European Court Annuls Harassment Finding Against Former MEP Monica Semedo

Introduction

The European Union’s General Court has overturned a decision made by European Parliament President Roberta Metsola, annulling both the finding of harassment and the fine of €3,380 imposed on former Liberal MEP Monica Semedo in 2023. This ruling highlights critical issues regarding the rights of defense in such cases and underscores the importance of procedural fairness within the European Parliament’s disciplinary processes. The case began with a complaint from a former parliamentary assistant, leading to a lengthy investigation and subsequent sanctions against Semedo, who has consistently denied any wrongdoing.

Background of the Case

The allegations against Monica Semedo date back to November 2022, when the European Parliament’s advisory committee concluded that her actions constituted psychological harassment following a complaint from a former parliamentary assistant. In December 2022, President Metsola provided Semedo with an anonymized version of the report for her feedback. However, Semedo contested the findings and requested full access to the case file, which was denied. Despite her objections, Metsola imposed the fine and harassment finding in April 2023. This marked the second time Semedo faced such sanctions during her 2019-2024 mandate.

In addition to the 2023 ruling, Semedo had previously faced disciplinary action in January 2021, when she was suspended for 15 days following similar allegations of psychological harassment by three parliamentary assistants. These allegations led to her resignation from Luxembourg’s Democratic Party, though she continued to serve as an independent MEP within the Liberal group in the European Parliament.

The General Court’s Ruling

The General Court’s decision to annul the harassment finding and the fine imposed on Semedo was based on significant procedural irregularities. The court ruled that Semedo’s rights of defense had been violated, as she was not provided with a complete summary of witness statements gathered during the investigation. The anonymized report shared with her did not accurately reflect the substance of the testimony, according to the court. This lack of transparency compromised Semedo’s ability to mount an effective defense, rendering the sanctions unlawful.

The court further emphasized that the failure of the advisory committee and the Parliament’s president to disclose key documents relied upon in the case undermined the legality of the measures taken against Semedo. This judgment sets a precedent, reinforcing the importance of ensuring that individuals accused of misconduct within EU institutions are granted full access to the evidence against them.

Implications of the Ruling

The General Court’s decision has significant implications for the European Parliament’s handling of disciplinary cases. It highlights the need for greater transparency and procedural fairness to ensure that the rights of all parties involved are protected. By annulling the finding and the fine, the court has sent a clear message that the targeting of individual rights cannot be compromised, even in cases involving serious allegations such as harassment.

The ruling also raises questions about the effectiveness of the Parliament’s internal disciplinary processes. While the institution has mechanisms in place to address misconduct, the Semedo case reveals gaps in ensuring that these processes are fair and equitable. The court’s decision serves as a call to action for the Parliament to review and strengthen its procedures to prevent similar issues in the future.

Next Steps for the European Parliament

The European Parliament has two months to decide whether to appeal the General Court’s ruling to the Court of Justice, the EU’s highest court. While the Parliament’s press service acknowledged the decision and stated that it is under review, it remains unclear whether an appeal will be pursued. Should the Parliament choose not to appeal, the annulment of the harassment finding and the fine will stand, effectively clearing Semedo’s record in this case.

For Monica Semedo, the ruling represents a significant victory in a long and challenging legal battle. It also brings closure to a period marked by intense scrutiny and professional consequences, including her suspension and resignation from her political party. Regardless of the Parliament’s next steps, the case underscores the importance of upholding the rule of law and individual rights within the EU’s institutional framework.

Conclusion

The General Court’s annulment of the harassment finding and fine against Monica Semedo is a landmark decision that highlights the importance of procedural fairness and transparency within the European Parliament. By ensuring that individuals are granted the right to a full defense, the court has reaffirmed the principles of justice that underpin the EU’s legal system. As the Parliament considers its next steps, this case serves as a reminder of the need for robust and equitable disciplinary processes that balance the rights of all parties involved.

While the ruling brings a measure of resolution to Semedo’s case, it also raises broader questions about accountability and fairness within the EU’s institutions. Moving forward, the Parliament must take steps to address these concerns and ensure that similar issues are not repeated in the future.