The European Commission failed to prevent a conflict of interest relating to outgoing agriculture commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski, following a complaint.

In dealing with the complaint, the Commission decided there was no conflict of interest on the part of Wojciechowski, with an EU ombudsman subsequently saying this was not examined sufficiently and there were “legitimate concerns”.

The complaint was made in March 2022 by an organisation representing Polish farmers, who lodged a complaint concerning Polish agricultural legislation.

The organisation subsequently alerted the Commission in August 2023 that the brother of the Commissioner for Agriculture - Grzegorz Wojciechowski, a lawmaker for the party that was in power in Poland up to December 2023 - was among the members of the Polish parliament who had proposed the legislation in question.

Amendment

This related to a 2016 amendment to Polish law which the farm organisation claimed created extra eligibility requirements to access CAP payments.

The farm organisation did not receive a reply to the letter in which it raised concerns about the potential conflict of interest.

The complaint was dealt with by the Commission’s directorate-general for agriculture (DG-Agri), which reports to Janusz Wojciechowski.

In October 2023, the Commission notified the farm organisation of its intention to close the complaint case as it considered the Polish legislation in question did not breach EU law.

Dissatisfied with the situation, the Polish farm organisation turned to the European ombudsman on 2 November 2023.

Ombudsman assessment

The European ombudsman said the Commission’s delay in assessing the conflict of interest allegations in this case is “regrettable”.

“In particular, the fact that the Commission appears not to have taken any steps to suspend the decision-making process on the infringement complaint after the complainant raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest,” it said.

The ombudsman concluded that the Commission only assessed what the commissioner’s brother’s personal interest might be and should have also assessed whether the commissioner himself may have had a personal interest.

The ombudsman said the Commission “failed to reassure the complainant that its concerns were being taken seriously and that its handling of the infringement complaint was beyond reproach”.

“The brother of the Commissioner for Agriculture proposed the national law at issue in the infringement complaint. It is clear to the ombudsman that this put the commissioner in a conflict-of-interest situation.

“Considering that the Commissioner for Agriculture is responsible for the department dealing with that infringement complaint, this personal interest is of such a nature that it gives rise to legitimate concerns as to how it could influence or be perceived to influence the independent performance by the commissioner of his duties.

“The ombudsman’s view is that the Commission’s assessment of the conflict-of-interest allegation was flawed,” it added.

The ombudsman made suggestions on how this process could be improved in the future.