The European Union’s culture of secrecy is a threat to democracy

24 Jun 2026, 09:08 by https://euobserver.com/author/paivi-leino-sandberg/, https://euobserver.com/author/marjaana-varmavuori/ · EUobserver

In journalism, delays in responding to requests for information can lead to delays or even failure to report on a story. This directly affects the right of EU citizens to be informed about EU decision-making

Opinion

Unlock article and share
By Päivi Leino-Sandberg and Marjaana Varmavuori,
Helsinki
,

The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states unequivocally: ‘Any citizen of the Union, and any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a member state, has a right of access to documents of the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union, whatever their medium’.

Despite this, the EU is increasingly hiding things from journalists, researchers and members of civil society.

When Finland joined the EU, it emphasised that “open government, including public access to official records, is a principle of fundamental legal and political importance” and that it “will continue to apply this principle in accordance with its rights and obligations as a member of the European Union”.

In recent years, Finland has grown more passive in its work for increased EU transparency.

Growing secrecy and narrowing access to documents prevent EU citizens from accessing truthful information, increase distrust and erode the EU’s fundamental values.

Secrecy has a long tradition in the EU, but the European Commission has clearly limited the publicity of its activities during Ursula von der Leyen’s second presidency.

The commission’s new Rules of Procedure significantly limit what counts as an official document. They authorise withholding and destroying information even after a request for access has been made. The commission has, on flimsy grounds, concealed legal documents and files related to the regulation of technology giants, among other things.

It is now almost impossible to monitor how the EU uses its power, for example, in relation to large platform companies.

The European Ombudsman has already intervened in the commission’s practice of withholding information, for example, in the implementation of the Digital Services Act (DSA). In important and politically controversial cases, requests for access to documents can take years to respond to.

Researchers and journalists' requests for information and documents are often met with denials or claims that the information does not exist. Appeals are slow and expensive. Direct contact information for EU officials is increasingly difficult to find. In the EU courts, applicants are required to have legal representation, and few have the opportunity to do so.

These shortcomings were highlighted in a letter sent to the commission by European journalists in spring 2025. The commission did not react to the letter, although the European Ombudsman had previously drawn attention to systematic delays in the disclosure of documents and overly broad interpretations of exceptions to the right to information.

The commission often does not provide evidence that the disclosure of a document would cause harm.

Delays kill stories

Of particular concern is the upcoming legislation on information security, the Information Security Regulation (also known as InfoSec).

In the EU, sensitive documents relating to public security, defence or military matters are protected by security classifications, which restrict who can access the documents within the EU institutions.

A new regulation under preparation would extend security classifications to all policy areas. Only those with a legitimate need to access documents would be able to do so on a ‘need to know’ basis. Such restrictions have been feared to put an end to the current form of EU document transparency.

The preparation of the regulation has taken place in complete silence among the security authorities. In Finland, the matter was discussed only in the parliament's administrative committee, and security authorities and the security police were consulted as experts. The impact of the proposal on the implementation of the principle of openness has not been assessed.

Finland should continue to commit to the principles of open government that were emphasised during its negotiations for EU membership. Finland and the other Nordic countries must address the EU's increasing secrecy.

This article was first published in Helsingin Sanomat on 21 June 2026

Unlock article and share