Brussels, 3 December 2025

Note for the attention of Mr Piotr Serafin

Commissioner for Budget, Anti-Fraud and Public Administration

Subject: EEAS-gate – Recent case concerning the establishment of the Academy for European Diplomats at the College of Europe in Bruges

1. Preamble

Regarding this latest scandal, it is important to begin by recalling the presumption of innocence for all individuals concerned.

2. It is the credibility of our institutions, as well as the reputation of the European public service, that are being called into question (see Press Review)

Nevertheless, it is equally clear that this new case, coming on the heels of several recent ones, has already a disastrous impact on the credibility of the institutions involved and, more broadly, on citizens’ perceptions of all European institutions.

This situation also deeply affects staff: I have already received dozens of messages expressing deep frustration and real anger as the staff members once again feel, in a way, like victims of the reputational damage caused by such cases.

It is particularly troubling that this public procurement case concerns the College of Europe, the very cradle of European culture and values, where young students from across the continent come to train and where many colleagues have studied. This adds an even more serious dimension to the matter, especially as the contract in question concerns the establishment of the Academy for European Diplomats.

Both staff members and alumni of the College of Europe, many of whom now work within our services, share a strong commitment to the European ideal. They attach genuine importance to defending a European civil service worthy of its responsibilities and mission. They are also convinced that there could not—and cannot—be an ambitious European project without a European civil service composed of true professionals devoted to European affairs and committed to defending the European general interest.

You can therefore understand the concern, both ours and theirs, generated by seeing the reputation of the College of Bruges called into question, and the strong expectation that full clarity be provided without delay.

The same applies to the allegations of breaches of rules and favouritism in the context of a public procurement procedure, an area in which the European institutions, as the authors of the rules applied in the Member States, must absolutely lead by example and remain a reference point for every European contracting authority.

3. Few Reassuring elements

One reassuring aspect is that, unlike in previous cases, the investigations and measures taken here originated from the initiative of the EU bodies established to combat fraud and irregularities within the institutions themselves, namely OLAF and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

This demonstrates that the system is capable of identifying problems within its own structures without waiting for intervention from external bodies, while ensuring effective cooperation with the police and judicial authorities of the Member State concerned.

It is also reassuring that the institutions immediately accepted the request to lift the immunity of the individuals involved, allowing justice to take its course without obstruction.

This confirms that the current legal framework is effective, and that any difficulties observed elsewhere stem solely from inadequate application of the rules.

4. Our requests

In this context, we call on you to:

4.1. Resist inappropriate political pressure

Firmly resist any political theatrics already looming, which seek to use these cases as a pretext to call for changes to the rules or a reform of the Staff Regulations.

The rules, both in the Staff Regulations and in the Financial Regulation, are already fully adequate to prevent and address any potential misconduct. They simply need to be applied with the necessary rigour.

4.2. Ensure the Large-Scale Review is not instrumentalised

It is essential to avoid any situation in which the Large-Scale Review exercise might be perceived as the logical continuation of past disastrous Reforms aligned with a political agenda aimed at dismantling our European public administration.

Several external observers already interpret it in this way (link), pointing to the risk that the political intention could be to shift from a permanent, independent civil service to a flexible, temporary workforce aligned with shifting political priorities.

While Ms Day’s statements during your meeting with staff, firmly denying that the permanence of the civil service had ever been questioned, were reassuring, it remains important to dispel any remaining concerns at every stage of the exercise.

The exercise must therefore clearly aim to strengthen the competence, independence, and permanence of the European civil service—three essential conditions enabling staff to fulfil the mission entrusted to them by the Treaties and by European citizens.

• · Competence, because serving the European general interest requires a high level of technical expertise and rigour.
• · Permanence, because it reinforces the independence of the civil service and because European integration is a long-term endeavour.
• · Independence, because the European civil service must retain its freedom of judgement and operational capacity in the face of political, economic, and administrative pressures.

It must be recalled, loudly and clearly, that only the individual independence of staff members can guarantee the independence of the administrations to which they belong. This is a fundamental feature of any civil service, but it is particularly crucial for the European civil service, which faces far greater internal and external pressures.

As rightly underlined, the Large-Scale Review is not only about administrative modernisation.

It is also about sending a clear and strong political signal on whether the Commission intend to preserve the institutional capacity and political autonomy required to chart a path for a Union grounded in shared values rather than shifting political or national preferences. This is not the kind of “agility” or “flexibility” that can be accepted.

5. Conclusion

We must never forget that a united Europe exists not only thanks to its Founding Fathers, but also—and above all—thanks to the staff of the institutions who have contributed to giving life to their vision.

This is an indisputable truth, not an empty rhetorical or nostalgic formula, as some would sometimes like to suggest.

And we count on you for this indisputable truth to be reaffirmed with unequivocal clarity at all times, in every forum and on every occasion.

Cristiano Sebastiani,

Chairman

Copy:

Mrs Ursula von der Leyen, President

Mr Björn Seibert, Head of Cabinet of the President

Mr Grzegorz Radziejewski, Head of Cabinet; Mrs Ana Carrero Yubero, Member of Cabinet Serafin

Mrs Catherine Day,  Chair of the High-Level Group

Mr Stephen Quest, Director-General; Mr Christian Roques, Deputy Director-General; Mr Christian Linder, Director HR. F;

Mr Laurent Duluc, Deputy Head of Unit HR. F4 – DG HR

Staff

---