EU court says institutions cannot second-guess EPPO investigations

11 June 2026 , 11:03

456     0

EU court says institutions cannot second-guess EPPO investigations

Emphasizing the core principles of sincere cooperation and institutional balance, which mandate that each EU institution act strictly within its delegated powers as defined by the Treaties, the General Court of the European Union today annulled the European Court of Auditors’ (ECA) decision that refused the EPPO’s request, according to Article 19 of the Staff Regulations, to allow staff members to disclose information obtained during their duties. 

European Chief Prosecutor, Laura Kövesi, welcomes the General Court’s judgment in its appeal case (T-99/25): “This is a landmark ruling, the implications of which, I hope, will be fully recognized across all institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies of the EU. The Court of Justice of the EU made it abundantly clear: EPPO investigations serve the interests of the EU, and institutions receiving requests to lift immunities cannot dictate the conditions under which the EPPO can conduct these investigations. Confidentiality rules and immunities are in place to safeguard the proper functioning of institutions, not to impede the establishment of truth. The EPPO will persist in fulfilling its mandate independently and impartially, driven by evidence and the law alone.” 

In its judgment, the General Court elaborated that the "interests of the Union" justifying a refusal to permit disclosure of work-related information in legal proceedings must be interests of significant importance crucial to the European Union, which was not evident in the contested decision.  

Furthermore, the Court clearly concluded that the ECA’s stance -linking witness hearings to the issue of immunity for those under investigation- was based on an incorrect interpretation of EU law. 

The Court clarified that possessing the power to decide whether immunity should be waived did not grant the concerned institution the authority to question the EPPO’s evaluation of the facts underlying the investigation or the manner in which it is conducted. This would otherwise deprive the EPPO of the ability to fully exercise the powers granted to it by Article 28(1) of the EPPO Regulation. 

Concerning the EPPO’s previous requests to waive immunity, the General Court found that no valid decision has been made by the European Court of Auditors, and that it is in the interest of the European Union to allow the EPPO to collect additional evidence throughout the investigation, including through testimony from EU officials.  

This decision will enable the EPPO to continue its investigation by impartially gathering evidence for or against the person or persons under investigation, and to take any measures deemed appropriate in line with the relevant legal framework. 

The EPPO is the independent public prosecution office of the European Union. It is tasked with investigating, prosecuting, and adjudicating crimes against the EU’s financial interests. 

Emma Davis

Deputy Editor