Court Sides With New York Times in Case Over Access to E.U. Text Messages

EU Court Rules on Transparency of Text Messages Between Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO

In a significant ruling on May 14, 2025, the European Union’s General Court annulled the European Commission’s decision to deny The New York Times access to text messages exchanged between European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. These messages, dating from January 1, 2021, to May 11, 2022, are believed to contain crucial information regarding the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines worth billions of euros. The Commission had previously refused the request, claiming that von der Leyen had not retained the messages. This decision prompted The New York Times to file a lawsuit, leading to the court’s recent judgment. (reuters.com)

The case centers on whether text messages between public officials and private entities qualify as public records subject to disclosure. The European Commission argued that such messages were not official documents due to their “ephemeral nature” and that they were not retained. However, the court’s decision challenges this stance, emphasizing the importance of transparency and accountability in governmental communications, especially during critical negotiations like those for vaccine procurement. (ft.com)

This ruling has broader implications for transparency within the European Union. It sets a precedent for how communications between EU officials and private companies are classified and whether they are accessible to the public. The case also highlights the ongoing debate over the balance between privacy and the public’s right to information, particularly concerning decisions that have significant public health and financial impacts. (ft.com)

As the European Commission reviews the court’s decision, it is expected to reassess its policies on document retention and disclosure. This case underscores the necessity for clear guidelines on what constitutes a public record and the importance of maintaining transparency in governmental dealings, especially in matters of public health and safety.