European Anti-Fraud Office

Former OLAF logo

The European Anti-Fraud Office , shortly OLAF after the French designation O ffice Européen de L Utte A NTI F Raude , is an office of the European Commission , based in Brussels . Its task is the fight against fraud , corruption and all other illegal activities, through which the financial interests of the European Union (EU) are damaged. The office investigates inside and outside the European authorities; it supports, coordinates and monitors the work of national authorities in its area of ​​responsibility and designs the European Union's fight against fraud. It is assigned to the Commissioner for Taxation, Customs Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud .

prehistory

The fight against corruption at European level became an important issue in 1998/1999 after a series of corruption scandals in the European Commission . A scandal surrounding Commissioner Édith Cresson , who had employed a non-qualified friend as a personal advisor, led the Santer Commission to resign under pressure from the European Parliament . Not least through the revelations of the whistleblower and then EU official Paul van Buitenen , the inadequacies of OLAF's predecessor organization UCLAF ( Unité de coordination de la lutte anti-fraude , department for coordinating the fight against fraud ) became clear. Members of the European Parliament criticized UCLAF's organizational chaos, poorly conducted and documented investigations, incomplete and misleading data on cases of fraud, as well as hesitant action against EU officials when corruption is suspected. Because UCLAF is organized as a department dependent on instructions in the European Commission and this hinders the fight against irregularities and corruption within the EU institutions, a number of MEPs have called for the establishment of an independent investigative authority for cases of fraud and corruption. The newly designed European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) was then established by a decision of the European Commission on April 28, 1999.

Institutional position

OLAF office building on Rue Joseph II in Brussels

Although some MEPs had called for full, organizational independence from OLAF, the office was institutionalized as Directorate General at the European Commission . Like the entire area of ​​audit and fraud prevention, it was initially subordinate to the Commissioner for Administration . In the Barroso II Commission , which had been in office since 2010, the area was transferred to the portfolio of the Commissioner for Taxation and Customs Union , which was held by Algirdas Šemeta . According to the founding statutes, however, OLAF conducts its investigations completely independently and the Commission has no direct influence over them. The controversial institutional settlement within the Commission was viewed by the European Court of Auditors as unproblematic in a special report on OLAF in 2005 : “The hybrid position of the office, which is independent in its investigations, but subordinated to the Commission with regard to its other functions, does not have the independence of the investigative function endangered ". The UK's House of Lords , in a November 2006 report, also denied allegations that OLAF was too close to the Commission.

OLAF also works under the supervision of a supervisory committee made up of five independent external experts, the members of which are appointed by consensus by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The Supervisory Committee aims to ensure OLAF's independence by regularly monitoring the investigations carried out by OLAF. The Supervisory Committee, on its own initiative or at the request of the Director, issues opinions on the activities of OLAF; however, cannot intervene in the course of the investigation.

Internal organization

OLAF's office is located on Rue Joseph II in Brussels. In 2018, OLAF had a total of 389 staff.

The general manager

Giovanni Kessler (2014)

OLAF is headed by a Director-General who has full independence to act in the context of the Office's investigative activities. This was supported by its own six-person staff (as of 2018). As of March 1, 2000, the first general director was the German chief public prosecutor Franz-Hermann Brüner . On February 14, 2006, the EU Commission appointed him for a second, five-year mandate. When Brüner died in January 2010, Nicholas Ilett became managing director. On December 14, 2010, the European Commission appointed the Italian politician and public prosecutor Giovanni Kessler as the new OLAF Director General. With effect from October 16, 2017, Kessler was seconded as head of the Italian customs agency. The Finnish politician Ville Itälä has been the new General Director since August 2018 .

The directorates

OLAF is divided into four main departments, the so-called directorates. Each directorate in turn comprises several units (as of 2018):

• Directorate A Investigations I
  • EU Personnel Unit (A 1),
  • Neighboring Countries and International Organizations Unit (A 2),
  • Unit Centralized means (A 3), and
  • External Aid Unit (A 4).
• Directorate B Investigations II
  • Customs and Trade Fraud Unit (B 1),
  • Tobacco and Counterfeit Goods Unit (B 2),
  • Agriculture and Structural Funds Unit I (B 3),
  • Unit agriculture and structural funds II (B 4), and
  • Agriculture and Structural Funds Unit III (B 5).
• Directorate C Support for investigations
  • Investigation Processes Unit (C 1),
  • Information Systems Development Unit (C 2),
  • Operative Information System and Digital Forensics Division (C 3),
  • Legal Advice Unit (C 4).
• Directorate D Policy area
  • Unit initiatives and Planning & Hercule (D 1)
  • Fraud Prevention, Reporting and Analysis Unit (D 2),
  • Interinstitutional Affairs and External Relations Unit (D 3),
  • Anti-Fraud Policy Unit for Customs and Tobacco Products; AFIS (D 4).

tasks

OLAF's tasks include:

• the detection and prosecution of fraud in the customs area ,
• the detection of the misuse of EU subsidies,
• the detection of tax evasion (insofar as it affects the EU budget),
• the fight against corruption and serious misconduct within the EU institutions,
• the detection of other legal violations that damage the EU financially.

Overall, it is politically controversial which focus OLAF should set in its investigations. While the EU Commission would like to focus on combating product piracy and cross-border tax fraud, others are calling for OLAF to concentrate on combating fraud within the EU, reported the Austrian business journal Standard in May 2006. The chair of the OLAF Supervisory Committee, the independent control body The Authority, Rosalind Wright, stated in October 2006 that OLAF was striking the right balance between internal and external investigations.

Working method and work areas

OLAF can only carry out administrative investigations, the report of the responsible for OLAF investigation committee to the Committee on Budgetary Control of the European Parliament . As a result, the authority cannot initiate criminal or disciplinary proceedings - in the case of the former it is dependent on the judiciary of the member states, in the case of the latter on the corresponding EU bodies. "Once OLAF has closed an investigation and handed the case over to the Member State concerned, it has no control over the way forward," said Rosalind Wright, Chair of the Committee. The effectiveness of OLAF therefore depends to a large extent on two partners who implement the results of the investigations in formal procedures: the national judicial authorities and the other EU authorities.

OLAF's areas of work are:

• Own investigations (internal and external investigations)
• Assisting and coordinating other investigations
• Monitoring of other investigations
• "Intelligence"
• Designing the EU's fight against fraud.

OLAF itself investigates both EU authorities (internal administrative investigation) and institutions that are not part of the EU (external administrative investigation). It supports the investigations of other authorities, for example by offering information collected at EU level. It coordinates the investigations of the national authorities in cross-border cases. Monitoring follows the course of investigations by other authorities. In the area known internally as “intelligence”, OLAF provides the Member States or third countries with multidisciplinary expertise, strategic analysis and risk assessments.

In addition to OLAF, other EU institutions publish annual reports on fraud and corruption in the EU:

• Reports from the European Court of Auditors revealing irregularities in the use of EU funds,
• the European Commission's fraud report , in which all cases reported in the past year are statistically recorded,
• the European Parliament's fraud report drawn up by the Committee on Budgetary Control , which builds on and politically enriches the above reports and the OLAF report.

Results and cases

In 2004 the budget of the European Communities was € 111 billion with 25 Member States; In comparison, the budget of the Federal Republic of Germany in 2003 amounted to 250 billion euros. The irregularities recognized in 2002 were 2.12 billion euros, 614 million euros of which are attributable to EU structural policy . 1.18 billion euros were found by the Member States themselves and just under one billion euros in OLAF investigations. The irregularities also include missing documents or improperly used project funds.

According to the 2005 annual report, between July 2004 and 31 December 2005 OLAF received a total of 531 reports of fraud. Of these, more than half (274) were sorted out as so-called "non cases" and not processed further. External investigations were initiated in 124 cases and internal EU investigations in 40 cases. External investigations were followed up 42 times (monitoring), 34 times the investigations of national authorities were coordinated across borders. OLAF provided administrative assistance in criminal matters 17 times. As the German news agency dpa reported in July 2006, investigations were running in 452 cases at the end of 2005. It is about possible damage to the detriment of EU taxpayers amounting to around two billion euros. In 2005 OLAF brought 203 million euros back into the EU coffers, a year earlier it was 198 million euros.

Cigarette smuggling

The financially most spectacular OLAF investigations are the proceedings against tobacco companies for smuggling cigarettes into the EU. On the basis of OLAF's findings, in 2001 the EU and ten Member States brought tobacco companies to court in the US. In the first two instances, the lawsuit was dismissed because US courts did not collect foreign taxes. The plaintiffs then went to the United States Supreme Court in 2004 . The tobacco company Philip Morris reached an amicable agreement with the EU in 2004 to pay a maximum of 1.25 billion dollars to the EU and ten member states, depending on various factors.

In the period from 2006 to 2008, for example, Operation Boomerang , a manhunt and investigative operation against the smuggling of cigarettes across Europe, was supported by OLAF in terms of international coordination.

The Eurostat affair

The politically most explosive OLAF case was the Eurostat affair over black coffers at the Luxembourg-based Statistical Office of the European Union , which brought the Prodi Commission into distress in 2003.

The daily newspaper Die Welt described the heart of the affair in a comprehensive article (November 19, 2003). Since 1989, under its director Yves Franchet, Eurostat has placed fictitious orders or issued manipulated invoices. This money has flowed into black coffers for years, from which the employees financed expensive leisure activities. According to the newspaper, the amount of the damage was estimated by the European Commission in 2003 at 930,000 euros. Other estimates at this time were up to 40 million euros.

According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (dated July 6, 2003), the European Commission indirectly criticized OLAF's investigations in the Eurostat affair. As the newspaper reported, the Office had been investigating the matter since 1999, but it was not until the spring of 2003 that OLAF called on the judicial authorities in France and Luxembourg to pursue the investigation. The FAZ came to the conclusion that "Olaf seems overwhelmed to complete the investigations quickly".

The weekly Stern (July 5, 2003) claimed that the fraudulent EU statisticians had helpers in the EU anti-fraud office, OLAF. Since 1998, reports have been received there again and again. Despite serious allegations of fraud against Eurostat, relevant information was not even properly filed with OLAF. An incriminating testimony had even completely disappeared. In this report, the paper relied on an internal paper by OLAF lawyers.

In a resolution adopted on April 22, 2004, the European Parliament stated that the Eurostat case had "revealed serious problems with the working methods of both the Commission and OLAF".

OLAF itself stated in its 2005 annual report that it has been dealing with Eurostat since 2000. It closed four Eurostat cases in September 2003 and five further cases each in 2004 and 2005.

The Dalli Gate affair

In the wake of the bribe affair surrounding ex-health commissioner John Dalli , Der Spiegel reported on questionable investigation methods by the anti-fraud office of the EU. The allegations apply in particular to the former OLAF Director General Giovanni Kessler , who is said to have acted outside of his powers and the legal basis of OLAF. Kessler had interrogated the main witness herself and forced her to quickly sign the interrogation protocol. In addition, outside of its legal basis, OLAF had requested a list of incoming and outgoing telephone calls from the Maltese authorities. In the wake of the scandal, a parliamentary majority voted to bring clarity to the Dalli affair and to make OLAF's work more transparent. Der Spiegel even goes so far as to describe OLAF's actions as a violation of human rights.

China Goods Fraud

In 2017, EU investigators accused Great Britain of ignoring customs fraud involving goods from China for years and causing losses of 2 billion euros. In addition, there would be 3.2 billion euros, which EU countries such as Germany had lost on VAT.

Assessment of OLAF

The European Parliament moved to a public hearing in July 2005, a positive balance of the first six years of OLAF and summarized: "If it were not for the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), it would have to be invented." The Austrian MEP and standing rapporteur for OLAF affairs, Herbert Bösch , stated: “We are sending a clear message to OLAF staff that we recognize and appreciate their work.” The UK House of Lords stated in November 2006 that it was satisfied with the scope of the OLAF investigations. It suggested that OLAF should draw up a report showing how each Member State used the findings of the investigation provided by OLAF.

However , in its special report on OLAF in July 2005, the European Court of Auditors also highlighted a number of criticisms of OLAF's work:

• The Court of Auditors criticized the supervision exercised by the Office's management as inadequate, leading to considerable delays in the processing of files, the submission of inconclusive reports and results that were difficult to identify.
• The preparation and follow-up of the examinations are often inadequate.
• With the exception of the customs sector, cooperation with the Member States was an area that still needed significant improvement.
• There were also shortcomings in the information about the investigations carried out by OLAF and the measurement of the results. The Court of Auditors cited the recovery of misappropriated amounts or the disciplinary or criminal penalties that were imposed in cases of fraud as poorly informed points.
• There is no independent control of the legality of ongoing OLAF investigations and of compliance with the fundamental rights of those subject to an investigation. There is no fixed regulation for investigations, which regularly leads to legal disputes.

The Court of Auditors was indirectly in favor of concentrating the Office's resources on relevant investigations and reviewing the tasks entrusted to OLAF in this sense: "A realignment of the Office's activities to its investigative function would make better use of resources, particularly with regard to initiation Enable investigations in areas that are particularly prone to fraud. "

On the relationship between the European Commission and the EU member states and OLAF, Jeanne Rubner writes in her book Bruxelles Spritzen : “The anti-fraud authority Olaf, which is supposed to be the Commission's watchdog, is kept on a short leash.” And elsewhere: “ In the medium term, however, the problems lie less with Olaf than with the EU countries. It is you who slow down Olaf and make the investigators' work difficult. "

OLAF and the public

In his OLAF study ( see literature ) , Florian Neuhann described the Office's media and public relations work as “more of a deficit”. OLAF "did not succeed to a sufficient degree in presenting its policy convincingly to an interested public and the Parliament and in explaining the reasons for its current priorities". In addition, the office would perceive the media public as an opponent rather than a partner in the fight against fraud. For his part, the OLAF spokesman asked for understanding: “Of course, journalists want as much information as possible on a particular topic. However, the office has an obligation to ensure the protection of fundamental rights, legal norms and the integrity and efficiency of its investigations. "

Relations between OLAF and the media were seriously strained in March 2004 when the Belgian police searched the apartment and office of the Brussels Stern correspondent Hans-Martin Tillack and confiscated documents. The correspondent had quoted internal Office papers in critical reports on OLAF. At OLAF's request, the Belgian investigating magistrate had opened an investigation against unknown persons for a possible corruption offense. Proceedings against Tillack have not yet been opened. Lawsuits filed by Tillack - including before the European Court of First Instance - that he filed following the Belgian search operation were initially dismissed. Finally, in November 2007, Tillack's lawsuit at the European Court of Human Rights ended with the conviction of Belgium to pay 10,000 euros in damages for violating the freedom of the press.

The search sparked a discussion about freedom of the press in the EU; many journalists viewed this as a restriction on free reporting. According to Neuhann in his OLAF study, the Tillack case “revealed a change in public opinion; since then some journalists have been initially negative about the office ”. The European Ombudsman also criticized OLAF for this matter in a special report to the European Parliament. Tillack himself was awarded the Leipzig Media Prize 2005 for his reports on corruption and grievances within the EU bureaucracy .

See also

In its work, OLAF restricts itself to criminal offenses that are detrimental to the European Union. Two other offices are responsible for the fight against international organized crime in the EU:

• Eurojust
• Europol

literature

• Gerswid Altenhoff: The implementation of controls by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) in the United Kingdom , Mendel, Witten 2005, ISBN 3-930670-92-5 (= series of publications of the European Forum for Foreign Trade, Excise Taxes and Customs eV at the Westphalian Wilhelms -Universität Münster , Volume 23, also dissertation at the University of Münster 2003/2004).
• Kai F. Decker: Protection of fundamental rights in actions of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) , Kovač , Hamburg 2008, ISBN 978-3-8300-3721-7 .
• Nathalie Harksen: OLAF controls in Belgium: the implementation of on-site controls of economic operators by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) on the basis of Regulation No. 2185/96 and Regulation No. 1073/99 . Mendel, Witten 2004, ISBN 3-930670-86-0 (= series of publications of the European Forum for Foreign Trade, Excise Taxes and Customs eV at the Westphalian Wilhelms University of Münster , Volume 17, also a dissertation at the University of Münster 2003/2003).
• Hendrik Horn: The implementation of controls by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) in Ireland - Administrative law in the field of tension between Community law and national law , Mendel, Aachen 2002 (also dissertation at the University of Münster 2002).
• Florian Neuhann: In the shadow of integration. OLAF and the fight against corruption in the European Union . Nomos, Baden-Baden 2005, ISBN 3-8329-1479-X (= Munich Contributions to European Unification , Volume 12).
• OLAF (ed.): Prévenir la fraude en informant le public: Table ronde sur la communication antfraude , 2nd edition, OPOCE Office des publications officielles des Communautés européennes, Luxembourg 2006, ISBN 92-79-00823-4 (French).
• Jeanne Rubner: Brussels injections - corruption, lobbyism and the finances of the EU , Beck, Munich 2009, ISBN 978-3-406-58452-7 .

Web links

Commons : European Anti-fraud Office  - collection of images, videos and audio files

• OLAF homepage
• OLAF representation of the EU with a list of the individual legal acts
• Annual fraud reports
• Video about OLAF on the website of the European Commission

Individual evidence

1. ^ Press report of the European Parliament from October 6, 1998
2. ^ Press report of the European Parliament from October 6, 1998
3. ↑ 1999/352 / EG, ECSC, Euratom: Commission Decision of April 28, 1999 establishing the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)
4. ↑ ^{a b} Special Report 2005 of the European Court of Auditors on OLAF ( Memento of the original of July 21, 2006 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. dated August 18, 2005 
5. ↑ ^{a b} House of Lords: 50th Report of Session 2005-06 , Financial Management and Fraud in the European Union
6. ↑ ^{a b c} The OLAF Report 2018
7. ↑ VALENTINA POP: Italian appointed head of EU's anti-fraud office. In: EUobserver.com. December 14, 2010, accessed on December 15, 2010 (English): "According to his CV, Mr Kessler is fluent in both English and German as well as his native Italian." 
8. ↑ EPP gets another top job: Finland's Itala to head OLAF . In: euractiv.com . June 21, 2018 (English, euractiv.com [accessed July 18, 2018]).
9. ^ House of Lords, 50th Report of Session 2005-06, Financial Management and Fraud in the European Union , Volume II: Evidence , Q599
10. ↑ Rosalinde Wright's speech to the Budgetary Control Committee of the EU Parliament ( Memento of the original from October 22, 2008 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. held on February 21, 2006 
11. ↑ ^{a b} OLAF Annual Report 2005 ( Memento of the original of 30 January 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. for the period July 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005 
12. ↑ EU fraud investigators are more successful than ever before dpa report in: Die Welt from July 14, 2006
13. ↑ EU press release (Engl.) About the case against tobacco companies in the US ( Memento of the original on 20 October 2006 at the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link is automatically inserted and not yet tested. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. dated January 15, 2004 
14. ↑ EU press release on the agreement with the cigarette company Philip Morris ( Memento of the original from July 17, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. dated July 9, 2004 
15. ↑ Katja Ridderbusch: EU Commission goes on the offensive in the Eurostat affair In: Die Welt from November 19, 2003
16. ^ Hajo Friedrich: Commission takes "drastic measures" In: FAZ of July 9, 2003
17. ↑ Hans-Martin Tillack: Get rich! ( Memento from November 9, 2004 in the Internet Archive ) In: Stern from July 5, 2003
18. ↑ Resolution of the European Parliament on the Eurostat and OLAF affair of April 22, 2004
19. ↑ Errand boy of the commission. In: Spiegel. 18/2013 of April 29, 2013
20. ↑ Fraud authority Olaf: Great Britain owes the EU almost two billion euros . FAZ of March 10, 2017.
21. ↑ European Parliament : " Support for embattled OLAF at EP hearing " ( Memento of the original from 23 August 2006 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. 
22. ^ Jeanne Rubner: Brussels syringes. Corruption, lobbying and the EU's finances. Publishing house CH Beck, Munich 2009
23. ↑ Florian Neuhann: OLAF and the public. ( Memento of the original from January 30, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. In: Corruption in the European Union and how to fight it 
24. ↑ Alessandro Butticé: Information and communication policy for OLAF ( Memento of the original from January 30, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. in: OLAF Round Table on Anti-Fraud Communication ( Memento of the original of July 11, 2007 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice.  
25. ^ "Massive attack on freedom of the press" In: Stern from March 19, 2004
26. ↑ European Court of First Instance, press release (PDF; 104 kB) in case T-193/04 Tillack ./. European Commission
27. ^ Karen Krüger: "Stern" sued Belgium In: FAZ of April 15, 2005
28. ↑ Belgium has to pay reporters 10,000 euros in damages (tagesschau.de archive) In: tagesschau.de , November 27, 2007
29. ↑ EFJ Tells European Commission To Keep “Hands Off” Reporter's Files After Court Decision Press release of the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), April 20, 2005
30. ↑ Special report by the European Ombudsman for the EU Parliament on the Tillack case  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )  Info: The link was automatically marked as broken. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. dated May 12, 2005  
31. ↑ online
32. ↑ [1]