Qatargate: banning side gigs, prohibiting friendships, or a new Ethics Body? How the European Parliament is tackling corruption in its ranks
By Aari Helmelaid, 7 minutes
In December 2022, shocking revelations of corruption and acceptance of bribes from Qatar and other third countries in the European Parliament came to light, involving some of Europe’s top and former politicians like Eva Kaili and Antonio Panzeri. Since then, various suggestions have been debated to rebuild its reputation and reform the European Parliament to become a transparent and corruption-free institution, ranging from prohibiting unofficial friendships with third countries, to creating a whole new EU body specifically responsible for ensuring internal institutional ethics. Read the article to find out the main actors, the hidden criminal networks, and what the future might look like for the European parliament.
On the 9th of December 2022, the integrity of the European Parliament was hit to the core when Belgian journals Le Soir and Knack revealed the arrest of Greek MEP and EP Vice President Eva Kaili in her Brussels apartment. The incident set off investigations into the properties and conduct of several other members and parliamentary assistants, their families and partners, as multiple arrests were carried out in Belgium and Italy in relation to their involvement in the scandal.
Eva Kaili worked as a Greek MEP in the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats Group (S&D) from 2014 until her expulsion in 2022. Since January 2022, she was also one of the 14 Vice Presidents of the parliament where her portfolio included among technology and business-related subjects, handling relations with the Middle East. Kaili became a forerunner in defending Qatar, during a parliamentary debate on the state of Human Rights in relation to the FIFA World Cup, Kaili praised the human rights record of the country and criticised accusations of corruption towards Qatar. She also advocated for a visa liberation policy towards Qatar and Kuwait. When Qatari authorities cancelled visits for an MEP panel group dedicated to the Middle East ahead of the World Cup in 2022, Kaili went individually on a trip to meet with Qatari officials.
The Greek politician was charged with participation in a criminal organisation, corruption, and money laundering. The day after her arrest, Parliament president Roberta Metsola suspended Kaili’s powers and duties as vice president and on 13th of December the EP voted to remove Kaili from the position of the vice presidency. She was booted from the S&D parliamentary party and from her Greek centre-left Pasok party. Police found over 150,000 euros worth of cash in her Brussels residence. The money caught in the investigation is believed to have been financed by the countries of Qatar and Morocco in exchange for influence in the European Parliament to adopt Qatar-friendly policies. Kaili has denied the allegations but remains detained.
Another central actor in the scheme is former MEP Antonio Panzeri, who served as an Italian S&D MEP from 2004 to 2019. His parliamentary committees included Foreign Affairs and ironically, human rights. Like Kaili, Panzeri faces charges of participating in a criminal organisation, money laundering, and corruption. Panzeri served as chairman of the parliament's delegation for relations with the Middle Eastern and North African countries. Panzeri was said to also have had close ties with Arabic and Middle Eastern countries. Belgian investigations revealed Panzeri accepting bribes, gifts, and luxury trips from Moroccan officials. Panzeri was a major leader in conducting EU-Morocco relations and pressing the commission to allocate more funds to Morocco. After the end of his parliamentary term, Panzeri established the NGO Fight Impunity with the supposed aim to promote the cause of human rights and to bring violators to justice. Since the NGO was founded by several well-connected elite EP politicians and former politicians, prior to the scandal it had a respectable reputation in the Brussels lobby scene. Yet, behind the scenes, the organisation was being used to channel bribes. It is alleged that Fight Impunity had bank accounts in Morocco and Qatar and was linked to the Qatargate scandal.
The scandal involved family ties as well. Kaili’s Italian partner, Francesco Giorgi, a former parliamentary assistant to Panzeri (and later MEP Andrea Cozzolino) was arrested, as was her father Alexandros Kailis. Under suspicion came Panzeri’s wife and daughter, who were ordered to be extradited from Italy to Belgium on charges of aiding and abetting.
The picture is clear – this is a truly pan-European corruption case at the highest level of European politics. Houses were raided, arrests were made, and properties were seized in Belgium, Italy, and Greece. Benevolent organisations were revealed to be front companies where backstage, significant financial crimes were being committed, networks of bribed politicians were exposed to the public eye, and the reputation of the European Parliament was permanently damaged. Thus, begging the question, what is the European Parliament going to do about it? What internal changes will they make to tackle corruption at the highest level of European Politics?
The scandal has forced the EU to take a close look at shortcomings in their preventive and anti-corruption measures. The first action that was taken was the immediate suspension of all legislative work related to Qatar, including the visa liberalisation policy and official visits, at least until criminal investigations provide more assurance on the situation.
No more side gigs or shady donations
A major concern raised by parliament members was conflicts of interest in MEPs’ side jobs and other financial commitments. MEPs are not bound to only commit to working for the European parliament. They are not banned from holding second jobs, but they are obliged to declare these activities for transparency and conflict of interest reasons. Many MEPs and their assistants like Panzeri serve(d) on the advisory boards or boards of directors of NGOs, companies or they work(ed) as consultants. MEPs agreed to support a system whereby they must declare assets at the beginning and end of each mandate. Such declarations could be investigated by competent authorities for legitimate purposes in case of genuine allegations. Parliament will seek to establish an EU-level ban on donations from third countries to MEPs and political parties. The parliament agreed to introduce a “cooling-off period” for six months for exiting MEPs. Former MEPs would be prevented from lobbying in the European Parliament for that duration. Transparency critics have found the duration of this rule inefficient, calling it ‘purely symbolic’. They proposed that a cooling-off period of two years would prevent former MEPs from engaging in the “revolving doors” phenomenon.
Making the Transparency Register mandatory
Another proposal stemming from the parliament is making the EU Transparency Register mandatory for MEPs, former MEPs, and representatives of third countries. The Transparency Register is a database listing ‘interest representatives’ (organisations, associations, groups, and self-employed individuals) who carry out activities to influence the EU policy and decision-making process. The Register was mandatory for MEPs and lobbyists in the EU. However, when third country representatives/lobbyists met with European Parliament officials, through diplomatic missions or third parties, it wasn’t mandatory to record it in the register, casting doubt on its efficiency as a legitimate anti-corruption tool of the EU. A review of the Transparency Register revealed that errors on the database are frequent. Transparency is a core value of the EU institutions, but not always followed by EP staff. Only MEPs leading files or chairing committees are required to publish meetings, a rule not always followed. A large portion of the work of MEPs hence remains concealed. Most European-based lobbyists register their meetings in the Register, but when third-country lobbyists meet with MEPs, it isn’t recorded in the Register. The parliament voted to bar interest groups not in the database from entering the parliament’s premises and meeting with its members — a policy that critics say leaves considerable leeway, a mechanism that the European Commission already uses. Conservative MEPs have raised concerns that this process might undermine MEP’s mandates and interfere with independent parliamentarianism.
Investigating committees for Qatargate
The Parliament agreed to set up an inquiry committee to cover the results and consequences of Qatargate investigations and further address cases of corruption stemming from third countries. Additionally, a special committee on foreign interference in all democratic processes in the European Union, including disinformation, and the strengthening of integrity, transparency, and accountability in the European Parliament” was proposed to find flaws in Parliament’s framework and make proposals for reforms. This committee will also have to propose measures for the medium- and longer-term issues. Moreover, an EP Vice-President should be tasked with verifying integrity, fighting corruption, and foreign interference.
Banning parliamentary ‘friendship groups’
Metsola’s plan to tackle corruption calls to regulate parliamentary ‘friendship groups’ with third countries more strictly. MEPs occasionally form these groups to discuss relations with third countries. ‘Friendship’ groups and other policy working groups exist in the institution, but do not have official standing within and are often financed by lobbyists, one such ‘friendship group’ was the Qatar-EU Parliamentary Friendship Group to which most of the accused in the Belgian investigations are linked to.
A Fresh “Ethics” Body?
Finally, proposals were raised to create an Independent EU Ethics Body. Shortcomings in EP’s ethical guidelines and mechanisms were noted years before Qatargate happened. MEPs originally called on the Commission to move forwards with the creation of an ethics body in September 2021. Lack of urgency caused the proposal to fall to the back of the agenda. The proposal was once again picked up in 2023 in the wake of Qatargate. Vera Jourová, the Commission Vice President for Values and Transparency said the proposal for an independent ethics body would aim to help eight EU institutions have “common, clear and high standards” and “similar control mechanisms,” all while respecting different institutions’ “particularities.” She intends for the body to have investigative and sanctioning power. The Ethics Body should be able to initiate investigations on possible conflicts of interest or “revolving door” cases for Commissioners, MEPs, and staff. “Revolving doors” describes the phenomenon where politicians and public staff members move between roles as legislators in the public sector, and between jobs in the industries affected by the legislation and regulation. The European Ombudsman has also verbally supported the initiative.
Proposals are plenty, but if one thing is certain, it is that until 2023, the European Parliament’s relaxed internal staff rules and transparency requirements facilitated such a scandal. More so because the European Parliament is the only institution that is elected directly by the citizens. Parliamentary work is disrupted and democracy suffers. In 2024, MEPs are nearing the end of their mandate, and elections to the European Parliament will take place. The situation is particularly damaging for the Socialists & Democrats party and will likely have consequences in the voting results. Along with a new cohort, the EP will have to implement genuine reforms if it wishes to maintain the image of a trustworthy institution in front of European voters.
