Maybe you are a lawyer? Maybe you are a member of a EU country with similar or even better laws than Sweden? Either way, let’s do our best that we can to give these criminal hell.
I happen to be an EU citizen and some days ago I made a formal complaint to the EU Commission that they are conducting foreign policy that they are explicitly forbidden to do by the EU’s founding charter. They already deleted some tweets and press releases but that is not enough.
In Sweden where I live there is a law that put a bureaucrat in prison for <2 years in prison for doing things outside of their jurisdiction. EU regulations only punish them with loss of pension.
With your help, I hope to increase the possibility of success or the annoyance that this path of complaint. Here is my original complaint:
…
To whom it may concern, I have three issues that I need swiftly and clearly addressed:
-
I want all members of the EU Commission to immediately stop representing EU in any professional capacity concerning matters of foreign policy.
-
I want a public retraction of all statements on foreign policy that the commission has done.
-
I want to know the range of disciplinary actions on individuals and other measures that will be taken to insure that it will not happen again.
The commission should not represent the EU externally in foreign policy according to section 3, article 17. (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:C2012/326/01) Yet, there has lately been several of examples of this. Here is the latest example from your own homepage:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_23_4954
In addition, there are numerous examples on Twitter and widely disseminated public statements where the commission’s president is speaking in an official capacity on foreign policy matters.
This is a clear overreach of power that seriously undermine our democracy and my civic rights as an EU citizen. In Sweden, these overreaches are called “trolöshet mot huvudman” and carries a maximum of two years in prison. I’m sure other countries have their equivalent as this is seen an important form of corruption.
If I see no change and I do not get a timely satisfactory response within 7 days, then I will pursue this elsewhere to it’s furthest extent.
Sincerely,
Their response:
You have refereed to the conflict between Israel and Hamas. The EU has clearly and in the strongest wording condemned Hamas violent and indiscriminate terrorist attacks against Israel and deeply feel for the loss of human lives. We strongly emphasis Israel’s right to self defense according to human rights and international law against violent and indiscriminate attacks. We once again voicing for the protection of of all civilian at all times in accordance with human rights. This is a deceleration that is shared by the Commission and all the 27 member States which is evident of the announcement done by the European Council: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/sv/press/press-releases/2023/10/15/statement-agreed-by-the-27-members-of-the-european-council-on-the-situation-in-the-middle-east/
Analysis:
They simply didn’t address the core issue which makes me confident that we can hang them by the nose. The Council’s statement they referred to was done days after the Commission had already made several actions.
The president of the Commission is also a member of the Council. This should not be allowed because the Council do foreign policy while the Commission don’t. She would have to choose one or the other. Perception is still that Ursula von der Leyen is representing the EU as president and not as a council member.
Conclusion:
I’ll be happy with any help I can get but time is of the essence and I will call the EU in 9 h from now and ask them to give all the info as I will pursue criminal charges. Any help is valuable since I’m an engineer and not a lawyer.
My response would be something to the effect of:
Thank you for your response.
I take this reply as an acknowledgement that, due to the position you have articulated above, the statements made regarding foreign policy matters issued by [restate the parts from the first email] as EU representatives operating in an official capacity, are deemed to be justified on the basis that Israel’s current actions are necessary as self-defence.
Please clarify if I have misinterpreted this statement of yours as in any capacity.
Would you be so kind as to advise me of the EU’s position on the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 in regards to the people of Palestine and their struggle against the colonial domination and alien occupation and against the racist régime of Israel in the exercise of their right of self-determination?
And do the usual sign-off part.
Essentially what you want them to do is to state in clear terms, whether tacitly or implicitly, that these representatives were making statements about foreign policy and that they were doing it in an official capacity.
The second part of the email is to get them to paint themselves into a corner: either they have to acknowledge that Palestinians have a right to struggle by any means necessary against the Israeli regime as a colonial ruler and foreign occupier under international law or they have to state that Palestinians are actually Israeli citizens, in which case they are being denied their human rights by “their own” government, in which case you can get them to acknowledge that Israel is violating both its own domestic law as well as international law in that regard.
More than that, you are inviting them to provide you with a statement on foreign policy regarding the application of the Geneva Conventions to Palestinians, which they are either going to step into or they will refuse to provide a statement on the basis that they do not make statements about foreign policy.
They will most likely state that they uphold all international law etc. etc. in general terms. When they reply as such, do the same thing as written above:
"I take this response as an acknowledgement that the EU supports the right of the Palestinian people to struggle by any means necessary…
Please clarify if I have misinterpreted this statement of yours in any capacity."
Once you’ve got their responses, they’re essentially on the hook for this and that’s when I’d execute the next step of your plan as you will have gotten statements in very clear terms and you will have provided them with ample opportunity to seek clarification or to make amendments to their statements.
Great comment! I will borrow some of your wordings but I want to keep this as simple as possible. The core issue is that the Commission can’t do foreign policy but the Council can. There has been a blur of the roles and they are trying to cover for it.
International law is something else. I can start a new line of questioning around that. Actually, I’d love to do that! However, I don’t want to mix this issue with that. I think that the right body to address war crimes is The European Court of Human Rights. I can sue any state and EU entity there but I need to show damages. That somehow, I am being hurt by their actions.
Good luck with it! (Sorry that I’m not familiar with EU law and can’t be of more help.)
I feel like since they made a statement regarding Israel’s actions and international law that quoting the Geneva Conventions back at them and essentially demanding that they take a stand on this part of international law would expose their hypocrisy and potentially it would provide grounds for how they are overstepping their mandate. By failing to uphold international law while acting as your representative, you might have your foot in the door for proving that they have caused you damages.
This is my draft response:
Hi,
I didn’t ask you about the EU’s position on Hamas and Israel. I asked about the unlawful engagement of foreign policy done by the individuals at the EU Commission. Either you provide grounds for what supersede the code that I referred to or you explain to me how they are in line within the limitations of the mentioned capabilities of the commission. You also failed to advise me to report any transgression of individuals to the police since this is a crime punished in Sweden with at most 2 years in prison.
I will pursue this to its full extent unless you clearly tell me in detail that individuals are in compliance with regulations.
I give you three (3) days to do so. Playing games with me is not to my amusement.
…
Any improvement is much appreciated.
No offense but there’s no way that using legal means will really do anything. “Hey guys, let’s really stick it to the man and FILE A COMPLAINT!!! THAT’LL SHOW THEM!!! HEHEHE THEY CAN’T COMPREHEND THAT MY BIG BRAIN USES THE POWER OF wOrDs to DESTROY ARGUMENTS LIKE MY HERO BEN SHAPIRO!!!”
