Today, Volker Wissing is hosting the E-Fuels Dialogue at his Ministry of Transport. This is the second international summit at which the FDP Minister wants to bring together high-ranking representatives from politics, business and science “to discuss the potential of e-fuels and strategies for a successful market ramp-up.”
Unlike last year, when the conference took place in the run-up to the IAA motor show in Munich and the focus was therefore on cars, this time the International Aerospace Exhibition (ILA) is the occasion. Accordingly, the discussions will focus on the legal framework for the market-ready use of e-fuels in aviation. The European Union has already done its homework. From 2030, quotas for synthetic kerosene will apply in the EU.
Not so with the use of e-fuels in cars. The member states are still negotiating how e-fuels can still be used after 2035 despite the ban on combustion engines. So far without success, as many countries consider the softening of the combustion ban to be a fatal signal for the industry. However, Wissing recently said in an interview that there will be a proposal for the technical implementation of so-called “e-fuels only” vehicles by the end of the year. It is questionable whether this will be able to convince the skeptical member states. Read my colleague Markus Grabitz‘s feature to find out what legislative proposals the Commission could have up its sleeve in the new mandate in the automotive sector.
Have an exciting read
The big question in the next election period is whether the EU will back down on the ban on combustion engines. The CDU and CSU are selling their demand as an election campaign hit. Calls for this from some member states are increasing in volume. There are also increasing signals from manufacturers to adapt the EU’s CO2 fleet legislation. The background to this is that sales of EVs are far below expectations and the ramp-up of the technology is still a long time coming.
So far, there is no indication of how Ursula von der Leyen, who will presumably also lead the next Commission, feels about phasing out the combustion engine. The CDU and CSU call for the review to be brought forward from 2026 to 2025. So far, von der Leyen has not indicated whether she is prepared to do this.
Following the CO2 fleet legislation, the Commission will present a progress report in 2025. On this basis, the Commission will carry out the review provided for in the law in 2026 and, if necessary, propose changes to the CO2 fleet limits. Manufacturers and suppliers say that any regulatory changes would come very late. It would then take until 2028 for a proposal to be adopted by the Council and Parliament and for the industry to have legal certainty.
Regardless of whether the combustion engine phase-out remains, the operation of combustion vehicles with carbon-neutral fuels also needs regulation. The Commission is called upon to submit a regulatory proposal for this via the CO2 fleet legislation for passenger cars and heavy-duty vehicles.
The industry is also eagerly awaiting whether the Commission will make a proposal for the regulation of CO2 emissions from company cars. The consultation runs until July. Manufacturers and fleet operators are particularly interested in this topic, as are companies with a large number of vehicles in their fleets. It remains to be seen whether the Commission will make a proposal. What is clear is that the Directorates-General for Climate Action and Transport are wrestling with each other.
Important delegated acts are still pending for the Euro 7 pollutant regulation. The EU law was concluded in this mandate. The new limit values are due to enter into force in 2030. As with other very technical legislative procedures, the delegated acts are also decisive for the regulation of pollutants.
The Commission will also keep an eye on whether the expansion of the public charging infrastructure for alternative drive systems (AFIR) is keeping pace with regulation. An initial assessment of the regulation, which only recently came into force, is already due at the end of the year. There will be an evaluation of the EU Buildings Directive by 2028. This is likely to focus again on the question of whether private building owners will be obliged to create charging points for electric vehicles.
There is still the question of whether there will be separate legislation regulating access to data generated in the vehicle. So far, this data has been covered by the Data Act. It was said that in-vehicle data would be regulated by a special law. The proposal is still pending.
Other EU laws that were passed during this legislative period are due for review in the new mandate. For example, the General Regulation on Vehicle Safety. It is expected that the Commission will present an assessment by 2027 and, if necessary, make new proposals. In 2018, the Commission set the target of halving the number of road deaths and serious injuries by 2030. The “vision zero” to eliminate all traffic deaths is to be achieved by 2050. Manufacturers fear new regulations that will make vehicles more expensive.
The Renewable Energy Directive (RED) will be reviewed in 2028. Adjustments are expected to be necessary here. The Clean Air Directive, which enters into force in 2030 and provides an approximation of the limit values for important air pollutants to the WHO guideline values, could also come under renewed legislative scrutiny.
When Günter Verheugen, the EU’s former chief negotiator, signed the accession treaty with Prague, he was relieved: “The Czechs are certainly the most skeptical Europeans.” Some of the country’s political elite have since intensified their aversion to the EU. For example, Václav Klaus, who was president at Prague Castle when the Czech Republic joined admitted later that he had voted against accession.
In an essay for Mladá fronta Dnes on Monday, Klaus wrote: “There are very few big, so-called European problems. Even if the Europeans tell us the opposite. The vast majority of human problems are domestic, local, regional, national and not European in nature.” The EU is therefore “inventing” major problems. “That is why it is so committed to alleged climate change (and destroying the European economy with the Green Deal). […] That is why it is creating other global threats and why it came up with the fight against Covid some time ago.”
During the election campaign, former Prime Minister Andrej Babiš also emphasized that the EU does not want anything good for the Czech Republic and railed against the EU migration pact in particular. Together with the right-wing members of the Freedom and Direct Democracy party (SPD), he accuses the liberal-conservative government of having voted for the pact without necessity and thus for the redistribution of refugees to the Czech Republic.
Critics fail to mention that countries such as the Czech Republic, which are looking after many war refugees from Ukraine, are exempt from such measures for the time being. They also pretend that the Czechs are suffering because the state is providing massive support for Ukrainians in the country. Although Ukrainians are well integrated into the Czech labor market. In the first quarter of this year, they brought in more to the tax authorities than they cost, for the first time.
Nevertheless, Babiš continues to stoke fear and has pushed through a special session in parliament for the last few days before the election, where he wants to denounce the alleged threat of unhindered immigration. Migration is the biggest concern of many Czechs. And Babiš and his ANO movement see the EU elections as a trial run for the upcoming parliamentary elections, in which he wants to return to power.
In the latest polls for the EU elections, ANO is ahead with 23.1 percent, followed by the conservative alliance Spolu with 21.5 percent. Prime Minister Petr Fiala’s Spolu is the strongest force within the Prague government. Fiala’s coalition partners – the Pirates and the mayoral party STAN – would each receive around ten percent. How ANO, with its now harsh criticism of the EU, intends to position itself in the European liberal ALDE party in the future is a thrilling matter.
The Prague government camp has, of course, retained a certain skepticism towards the EU. The Green Deal goes too far for them and, like others, they are concerned about the important Czech car industry and farmers. In complete contrast to ANO, the Prague government has no ifs and buts about helping Ukraine. ANO insists on immediate peace negotiations – a demand that is also gaining increasing support among the population.
All in all, however, the Czechs do not take the European elections very seriously. The country is one of those expected to have the lowest voter turnout.
The Czechs’ low level of interest was topped by the neighboring Slovaks, who have always had the lowest voter turnout of all EU countries. This surprised analysts a little, as the Slovaks have a generally positive attitude towards the EU. In some cases, they trusted European institutions much more than those in their own country. How the Slovaks will behave this year is uncertain, according to political analysts. “Our country has completely different concerns at the moment,” is heard repeatedly.
These other concerns are linked to the recent assassination attempt on Prime Minister Robert Fico. A 71-year-old man shot the prime minister several times as he tried to shake hands with supporters waiting after a government meeting in the province. Fico’s life was saved thanks to the great efforts of doctors at the hospital in Banská Bystrica. The prime minister has since recovered sufficiently to be taken to his apartment in the capital Bratislava last weekend, where he is receiving home care.
In an initial reaction to the attack, the Social Democrat Peter Pellegrini, who will officially take office as the new President in a few days, called on the parties to cancel or at least significantly scale back the election campaign for the European Parliament. However, a meeting with the leaders of the parliamentary parties proposed by Pellegrini and the incumbent President Zuzana Čaputová did not take place.
And after a few days of relative calm, the dispute in the country also picked up speed again. The country is littered with election billboards. However, the election campaign mostly takes place on social networks, where the parties promote themselves. Certain narratives are missing, however. The opposition Progressive Slovakia (PS), for example, wisely refrained from using old slogans such as “We must beat Fico” so as not to be seen as further polarizing.
Government politicians are using the shock in the country to accuse and bully not only the opposition but above all the media. The law to abolish Slovakian public radio and television – a company modeled on the BBC – was passed in the first reading in parliament.
In addition, the most-watched television station Markíza, which has a Czech owner, has depoliticized its news to openly curry favor with those in power, according to employees. One of the station’s most popular presenters used a live broadcast to warn of an “impending Orbanization.” The owners immediately canceled the show.
There is currently no sign of the situation calming down. It seems relatively clear who will benefit from this in the EU elections: according to the polls after the attack, the preferences of Fico’s ruling left-wing nationalist Smer party rose massively, while those of the liberal opposition fell just as massively in the same period. As a result, Fico’s party is now ahead of the Liberals.
This trend is not only significant for the EU elections. It is to be expected that those in power will take advantage of the growing approval to further restructure Slovakia according to their own ideas. This could cause Brussels a great deal of concern in the longer term. Hans-Jörg Schmidt
Andrés Ritter likes the comparison with Hollywood movies. There’s always that one scene where criminals lose their pursuers at the border because the officials in the neighboring US state have no authority. It used to be a bit like that in the EU. The situation has changed since the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), which Ritter set up as Vice-President together with Laura Kövesi, Head of the Office, began its work in June 2021. “If criminals have no borders, then prosecutors should have no borders either,” says Ritter.
EPPO intervenes when European taxpayers’ money is at risk of falling into dark channels, such as money laundering, corruption and VAT fraud. Unlike the EU anti-fraud authority Olaf, which can only investigate, EPPO ensures that perpetrators are brought to justice.
The need for such a law enforcement agency is enormous, as the figures show. The damage from active EPPO cases currently amounts to €19 billion. This amount is likely to rise considerably in the coming years once the billions from the coronavirus recovery program have been paid out in full. “We are seeing a certain delay effect,” says Ritter.
Before moving to EPPO, the 59-year-old headed the public prosecutor’s office in Rostock, where he started in 1995 after completing his legal clerkship. He has plenty of experience with white-collar crime – and also in international legal assistance.
At one point, it looked as if Ritter would make a career in the EU Commission. After passing the Concours, he joined the then Directorate-General for Industry in 1998. His area of responsibility was similar to that of a public prosecutor. With his colleagues, he ensured that member states did not raise trade barriers with technical specifications, for example for firefighting equipment.
He really enjoyed working in an international authority with four nationalities in a team of five people. That he only stayed in Brussels for about a year and then returned to Rostock was due to the birth of his now 25-year-old daughter.
As the son of a German father and a Chilean mother, Ritter grew up bilingual and traveled a lot from a young age. He attended German schools in Peru and Spain before completing his A-levels in Venezuela. As a manager at the chemical company Bayer, his father often had to change his place of work. The moves made him flexible and adaptable, says Ritter.
When he first heard about the plans for a European Public Prosecutor’s Office, he pricked up his ears because the job in Luxembourg combines his two great passions: Working as a public prosecutor and Europe. It appealed to him to set up a new office, even if the workload is high for everyone: “Nobody here only works eight hours.”
Ritter currently has the case of the former Vice-President of the European Parliament, Eva Kaili, on his desk. She is suspected of not having spent up to €150,000 on an assistant as claimed. The investigations are running parallel to Katargate. It was the European Public Prosecutor’s Office that requested to lift Kaili’s immunity.
EPPO is becoming better known with each passing year. Both private individuals and authorities are reporting suspected cases to Luxembourg more frequently, 60 percent more in 2023 compared to the previous year. However, Ritter believes it is even more important that the authority actually ensures that cooperation between European investigative authorities is seamless. In Operation Huracán, 3,000 investigators were deployed in seven European cities in one day. Four of the five suspects confessed. The evidence was overwhelming. Ritter sees this as proof of the quality of the investigations.
Ritter and his colleagues are repeatedly surprised by the differences in the national legal systems. If they see deficits that conflict with European law, they report them to the Commission.
In his letter of application, he emphasized that he expected the EPPO to have an extremely positive effect, “far beyond the protection of the financial interests of the European Union.” Last year, his term of office was extended by three years until the end of 2026. He already sees the claim fulfilled: “We are contributing to the credibility of the EU.”
There are only a few days to go until the European elections, but the election campaign in Germany is rippling along. The headlines are dominated by budget disputes and floods, not discussions about Europe’s self-defense or enlargement. The campaigners are barely penetrating the German political and media scene.
Veteran European politicians such as Elmar Brok are now reminding us what is actually at stake: “Don’t gamble away Europe!” is the title of the book written by the long-standing CDU MEP together with journalist Peter Köpf. A Europe that does not regain the strength to integrate will perish like the ancient Greek cities, warns Brok. “This is nothing less than a question of war and peace.”
This may seem exaggerated to many younger people, for whom European unification is the norm. However, the parties on the fringes are campaigning for votes with slogans that call this unification into question. Brok warns that destroying the supranational EU and replacing it with a “Europe of nations” would mean relying on a concept that has led to war every 30 years for the past 300 years. He quotes former French President Mitterand: “Le nationalisme, c’est la guerre!”
The 78-year-old also addressed words of warning to his party colleague Ursula von der Leyen. It was essential that the Commission President worked together with Italy’s head of government Giorgia Meloni in the European Council and traveled to Tunisia with her to conclude a migration pact. But: “It would be disastrous for the EU’s reputation and cohesion if the next Commission President were to take office with the help of right-wing or left-wing radicals.”
Brok considers the debate as to whether someone is German, French or European to be nonsensical. Politics should tackle problems at the level where they can best be solved. Unlike regions or nation-states, however, Europe is a product of reason, not emotion. “Europe needs justification.” And therefore results.
For Brok, a Member of the European Parliament for almost 40 years, it is clear: “Where the EU works supranationally instead of intergovernmental and without the veto principle, it is successful.” In view of the possible accession of new member states, it is clear that the Council will also have to decide on foreign or tax policy by a qualified majority in future. Retaining the right of veto would mean “Eurosclerosis, and even more: the end of the EU.”
The CDU politician also believes that German politicians have a duty. The decision-making processes in Brussels are often delayed by Germany, “whose uncoordinated behavior, dysfunctionality and weak decision-making structures are paralyzing the EU.” At the same time, German politicians have recently sent “devastating signals of arrogance towards their partners.”
As examples, he cites Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s approach to building a European air defense or the lack of communication regarding the “double whammy.” Helmut Kohl had always made sure that the power of the country with the most inhabitants and the largest economic output was not used demonstratively, according to Brok. “The new German foreign policy approach, on the other hand, is tantamount to paternalism.” Till Hoppe
Today, Volker Wissing is hosting the E-Fuels Dialogue at his Ministry of Transport. This is the second international summit at which the FDP Minister wants to bring together high-ranking representatives from politics, business and science “to discuss the potential of e-fuels and strategies for a successful market ramp-up.”
Unlike last year, when the conference took place in the run-up to the IAA motor show in Munich and the focus was therefore on cars, this time the International Aerospace Exhibition (ILA) is the occasion. Accordingly, the discussions will focus on the legal framework for the market-ready use of e-fuels in aviation. The European Union has already done its homework. From 2030, quotas for synthetic kerosene will apply in the EU.
Not so with the use of e-fuels in cars. The member states are still negotiating how e-fuels can still be used after 2035 despite the ban on combustion engines. So far without success, as many countries consider the softening of the combustion ban to be a fatal signal for the industry. However, Wissing recently said in an interview that there will be a proposal for the technical implementation of so-called “e-fuels only” vehicles by the end of the year. It is questionable whether this will be able to convince the skeptical member states. Read my colleague Markus Grabitz‘s feature to find out what legislative proposals the Commission could have up its sleeve in the new mandate in the automotive sector.
Have an exciting read
The big question in the next election period is whether the EU will back down on the ban on combustion engines. The CDU and CSU are selling their demand as an election campaign hit. Calls for this from some member states are increasing in volume. There are also increasing signals from manufacturers to adapt the EU’s CO2 fleet legislation. The background to this is that sales of EVs are far below expectations and the ramp-up of the technology is still a long time coming.
So far, there is no indication of how Ursula von der Leyen, who will presumably also lead the next Commission, feels about phasing out the combustion engine. The CDU and CSU call for the review to be brought forward from 2026 to 2025. So far, von der Leyen has not indicated whether she is prepared to do this.
Following the CO2 fleet legislation, the Commission will present a progress report in 2025. On this basis, the Commission will carry out the review provided for in the law in 2026 and, if necessary, propose changes to the CO2 fleet limits. Manufacturers and suppliers say that any regulatory changes would come very late. It would then take until 2028 for a proposal to be adopted by the Council and Parliament and for the industry to have legal certainty.
Regardless of whether the combustion engine phase-out remains, the operation of combustion vehicles with carbon-neutral fuels also needs regulation. The Commission is called upon to submit a regulatory proposal for this via the CO2 fleet legislation for passenger cars and heavy-duty vehicles.
The industry is also eagerly awaiting whether the Commission will make a proposal for the regulation of CO2 emissions from company cars. The consultation runs until July. Manufacturers and fleet operators are particularly interested in this topic, as are companies with a large number of vehicles in their fleets. It remains to be seen whether the Commission will make a proposal. What is clear is that the Directorates-General for Climate Action and Transport are wrestling with each other.
Important delegated acts are still pending for the Euro 7 pollutant regulation. The EU law was concluded in this mandate. The new limit values are due to enter into force in 2030. As with other very technical legislative procedures, the delegated acts are also decisive for the regulation of pollutants.
The Commission will also keep an eye on whether the expansion of the public charging infrastructure for alternative drive systems (AFIR) is keeping pace with regulation. An initial assessment of the regulation, which only recently came into force, is already due at the end of the year. There will be an evaluation of the EU Buildings Directive by 2028. This is likely to focus again on the question of whether private building owners will be obliged to create charging points for electric vehicles.
There is still the question of whether there will be separate legislation regulating access to data generated in the vehicle. So far, this data has been covered by the Data Act. It was said that in-vehicle data would be regulated by a special law. The proposal is still pending.
Other EU laws that were passed during this legislative period are due for review in the new mandate. For example, the General Regulation on Vehicle Safety. It is expected that the Commission will present an assessment by 2027 and, if necessary, make new proposals. In 2018, the Commission set the target of halving the number of road deaths and serious injuries by 2030. The “vision zero” to eliminate all traffic deaths is to be achieved by 2050. Manufacturers fear new regulations that will make vehicles more expensive.
The Renewable Energy Directive (RED) will be reviewed in 2028. Adjustments are expected to be necessary here. The Clean Air Directive, which enters into force in 2030 and provides an approximation of the limit values for important air pollutants to the WHO guideline values, could also come under renewed legislative scrutiny.
When Günter Verheugen, the EU’s former chief negotiator, signed the accession treaty with Prague, he was relieved: “The Czechs are certainly the most skeptical Europeans.” Some of the country’s political elite have since intensified their aversion to the EU. For example, Václav Klaus, who was president at Prague Castle when the Czech Republic joined admitted later that he had voted against accession.
In an essay for Mladá fronta Dnes on Monday, Klaus wrote: “There are very few big, so-called European problems. Even if the Europeans tell us the opposite. The vast majority of human problems are domestic, local, regional, national and not European in nature.” The EU is therefore “inventing” major problems. “That is why it is so committed to alleged climate change (and destroying the European economy with the Green Deal). […] That is why it is creating other global threats and why it came up with the fight against Covid some time ago.”
During the election campaign, former Prime Minister Andrej Babiš also emphasized that the EU does not want anything good for the Czech Republic and railed against the EU migration pact in particular. Together with the right-wing members of the Freedom and Direct Democracy party (SPD), he accuses the liberal-conservative government of having voted for the pact without necessity and thus for the redistribution of refugees to the Czech Republic.
Critics fail to mention that countries such as the Czech Republic, which are looking after many war refugees from Ukraine, are exempt from such measures for the time being. They also pretend that the Czechs are suffering because the state is providing massive support for Ukrainians in the country. Although Ukrainians are well integrated into the Czech labor market. In the first quarter of this year, they brought in more to the tax authorities than they cost, for the first time.
Nevertheless, Babiš continues to stoke fear and has pushed through a special session in parliament for the last few days before the election, where he wants to denounce the alleged threat of unhindered immigration. Migration is the biggest concern of many Czechs. And Babiš and his ANO movement see the EU elections as a trial run for the upcoming parliamentary elections, in which he wants to return to power.
In the latest polls for the EU elections, ANO is ahead with 23.1 percent, followed by the conservative alliance Spolu with 21.5 percent. Prime Minister Petr Fiala’s Spolu is the strongest force within the Prague government. Fiala’s coalition partners – the Pirates and the mayoral party STAN – would each receive around ten percent. How ANO, with its now harsh criticism of the EU, intends to position itself in the European liberal ALDE party in the future is a thrilling matter.
The Prague government camp has, of course, retained a certain skepticism towards the EU. The Green Deal goes too far for them and, like others, they are concerned about the important Czech car industry and farmers. In complete contrast to ANO, the Prague government has no ifs and buts about helping Ukraine. ANO insists on immediate peace negotiations – a demand that is also gaining increasing support among the population.
All in all, however, the Czechs do not take the European elections very seriously. The country is one of those expected to have the lowest voter turnout.
The Czechs’ low level of interest was topped by the neighboring Slovaks, who have always had the lowest voter turnout of all EU countries. This surprised analysts a little, as the Slovaks have a generally positive attitude towards the EU. In some cases, they trusted European institutions much more than those in their own country. How the Slovaks will behave this year is uncertain, according to political analysts. “Our country has completely different concerns at the moment,” is heard repeatedly.
These other concerns are linked to the recent assassination attempt on Prime Minister Robert Fico. A 71-year-old man shot the prime minister several times as he tried to shake hands with supporters waiting after a government meeting in the province. Fico’s life was saved thanks to the great efforts of doctors at the hospital in Banská Bystrica. The prime minister has since recovered sufficiently to be taken to his apartment in the capital Bratislava last weekend, where he is receiving home care.
In an initial reaction to the attack, the Social Democrat Peter Pellegrini, who will officially take office as the new President in a few days, called on the parties to cancel or at least significantly scale back the election campaign for the European Parliament. However, a meeting with the leaders of the parliamentary parties proposed by Pellegrini and the incumbent President Zuzana Čaputová did not take place.
And after a few days of relative calm, the dispute in the country also picked up speed again. The country is littered with election billboards. However, the election campaign mostly takes place on social networks, where the parties promote themselves. Certain narratives are missing, however. The opposition Progressive Slovakia (PS), for example, wisely refrained from using old slogans such as “We must beat Fico” so as not to be seen as further polarizing.
Government politicians are using the shock in the country to accuse and bully not only the opposition but above all the media. The law to abolish Slovakian public radio and television – a company modeled on the BBC – was passed in the first reading in parliament.
In addition, the most-watched television station Markíza, which has a Czech owner, has depoliticized its news to openly curry favor with those in power, according to employees. One of the station’s most popular presenters used a live broadcast to warn of an “impending Orbanization.” The owners immediately canceled the show.
There is currently no sign of the situation calming down. It seems relatively clear who will benefit from this in the EU elections: according to the polls after the attack, the preferences of Fico’s ruling left-wing nationalist Smer party rose massively, while those of the liberal opposition fell just as massively in the same period. As a result, Fico’s party is now ahead of the Liberals.
This trend is not only significant for the EU elections. It is to be expected that those in power will take advantage of the growing approval to further restructure Slovakia according to their own ideas. This could cause Brussels a great deal of concern in the longer term. Hans-Jörg Schmidt
Andrés Ritter likes the comparison with Hollywood movies. There’s always that one scene where criminals lose their pursuers at the border because the officials in the neighboring US state have no authority. It used to be a bit like that in the EU. The situation has changed since the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), which Ritter set up as Vice-President together with Laura Kövesi, Head of the Office, began its work in June 2021. “If criminals have no borders, then prosecutors should have no borders either,” says Ritter.
EPPO intervenes when European taxpayers’ money is at risk of falling into dark channels, such as money laundering, corruption and VAT fraud. Unlike the EU anti-fraud authority Olaf, which can only investigate, EPPO ensures that perpetrators are brought to justice.
The need for such a law enforcement agency is enormous, as the figures show. The damage from active EPPO cases currently amounts to €19 billion. This amount is likely to rise considerably in the coming years once the billions from the coronavirus recovery program have been paid out in full. “We are seeing a certain delay effect,” says Ritter.
Before moving to EPPO, the 59-year-old headed the public prosecutor’s office in Rostock, where he started in 1995 after completing his legal clerkship. He has plenty of experience with white-collar crime – and also in international legal assistance.
At one point, it looked as if Ritter would make a career in the EU Commission. After passing the Concours, he joined the then Directorate-General for Industry in 1998. His area of responsibility was similar to that of a public prosecutor. With his colleagues, he ensured that member states did not raise trade barriers with technical specifications, for example for firefighting equipment.
He really enjoyed working in an international authority with four nationalities in a team of five people. That he only stayed in Brussels for about a year and then returned to Rostock was due to the birth of his now 25-year-old daughter.
As the son of a German father and a Chilean mother, Ritter grew up bilingual and traveled a lot from a young age. He attended German schools in Peru and Spain before completing his A-levels in Venezuela. As a manager at the chemical company Bayer, his father often had to change his place of work. The moves made him flexible and adaptable, says Ritter.
When he first heard about the plans for a European Public Prosecutor’s Office, he pricked up his ears because the job in Luxembourg combines his two great passions: Working as a public prosecutor and Europe. It appealed to him to set up a new office, even if the workload is high for everyone: “Nobody here only works eight hours.”
Ritter currently has the case of the former Vice-President of the European Parliament, Eva Kaili, on his desk. She is suspected of not having spent up to €150,000 on an assistant as claimed. The investigations are running parallel to Katargate. It was the European Public Prosecutor’s Office that requested to lift Kaili’s immunity.
EPPO is becoming better known with each passing year. Both private individuals and authorities are reporting suspected cases to Luxembourg more frequently, 60 percent more in 2023 compared to the previous year. However, Ritter believes it is even more important that the authority actually ensures that cooperation between European investigative authorities is seamless. In Operation Huracán, 3,000 investigators were deployed in seven European cities in one day. Four of the five suspects confessed. The evidence was overwhelming. Ritter sees this as proof of the quality of the investigations.
Ritter and his colleagues are repeatedly surprised by the differences in the national legal systems. If they see deficits that conflict with European law, they report them to the Commission.
In his letter of application, he emphasized that he expected the EPPO to have an extremely positive effect, “far beyond the protection of the financial interests of the European Union.” Last year, his term of office was extended by three years until the end of 2026. He already sees the claim fulfilled: “We are contributing to the credibility of the EU.”
There are only a few days to go until the European elections, but the election campaign in Germany is rippling along. The headlines are dominated by budget disputes and floods, not discussions about Europe’s self-defense or enlargement. The campaigners are barely penetrating the German political and media scene.
Veteran European politicians such as Elmar Brok are now reminding us what is actually at stake: “Don’t gamble away Europe!” is the title of the book written by the long-standing CDU MEP together with journalist Peter Köpf. A Europe that does not regain the strength to integrate will perish like the ancient Greek cities, warns Brok. “This is nothing less than a question of war and peace.”
This may seem exaggerated to many younger people, for whom European unification is the norm. However, the parties on the fringes are campaigning for votes with slogans that call this unification into question. Brok warns that destroying the supranational EU and replacing it with a “Europe of nations” would mean relying on a concept that has led to war every 30 years for the past 300 years. He quotes former French President Mitterand: “Le nationalisme, c’est la guerre!”
The 78-year-old also addressed words of warning to his party colleague Ursula von der Leyen. It was essential that the Commission President worked together with Italy’s head of government Giorgia Meloni in the European Council and traveled to Tunisia with her to conclude a migration pact. But: “It would be disastrous for the EU’s reputation and cohesion if the next Commission President were to take office with the help of right-wing or left-wing radicals.”
Brok considers the debate as to whether someone is German, French or European to be nonsensical. Politics should tackle problems at the level where they can best be solved. Unlike regions or nation-states, however, Europe is a product of reason, not emotion. “Europe needs justification.” And therefore results.
For Brok, a Member of the European Parliament for almost 40 years, it is clear: “Where the EU works supranationally instead of intergovernmental and without the veto principle, it is successful.” In view of the possible accession of new member states, it is clear that the Council will also have to decide on foreign or tax policy by a qualified majority in future. Retaining the right of veto would mean “Eurosclerosis, and even more: the end of the EU.”
The CDU politician also believes that German politicians have a duty. The decision-making processes in Brussels are often delayed by Germany, “whose uncoordinated behavior, dysfunctionality and weak decision-making structures are paralyzing the EU.” At the same time, German politicians have recently sent “devastating signals of arrogance towards their partners.”
As examples, he cites Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s approach to building a European air defense or the lack of communication regarding the “double whammy.” Helmut Kohl had always made sure that the power of the country with the most inhabitants and the largest economic output was not used demonstratively, according to Brok. “The new German foreign policy approach, on the other hand, is tantamount to paternalism.” Till Hoppe
