How Ursula von der Leyen found herself facing resignation

On July 7, a debate on a vote of no confidence in the European Commission was held at the plenary session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg. The motion was initiated by Gheorghe Pipera, vice-chairman of the far-right European Conservatives and Reformists group from Romania. He drafted a motion calling for the resignation of the entire Commission in connection with the pandemic-era corruption scandal involving Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. The initiative was supported by 75 MEPs and was put into effect ( at least 10% of the 720 MEPs needed to initiate it) .

On July 2, European Parliament President Roberta Metsola informed the parliamentary group leaders of the need to hold the relevant debates and then vote directly on the no-confidence motion. The final stage of the procedure must take place no later than 48 hours after the start of the debates. This means the final decision on the future of von der Leyen's team will be made on July 10.

The procedure for passing a vote of no confidence in the European Commission is regulated by Article 234 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). This is one of the main mechanisms of parliamentary oversight over the executive branch of the EU . At least 24 hours must pass between the submission of the initiative and the vote, allowing parliamentarians time for debate. For a vote of no confidence in the EU's highest executive body to be passed, two -thirds of the MEPs present must vote in favor. If this happens, the entire Commission resigns, along with its president, but continues to serve until a new team is formed.

Since its creation, the European Commission has survived 11 attempts at a no-confidence vote, but MEPs have never managed to secure the required number of votes. Only once in its history has the entire European Commission resigned—that was Jacques Santer's team (1995–1999), which voluntarily resigned after being accused of corruption. However, Santer continued to serve as an MEP until 2004.

Accusations against von der Leyen began to surface during her first term as HEAD of the European Commission (2019–2024). In January 2023, The New York Times (NYT) decided to go to COURT to obtain access to von der Leyen's correspondence with Albert Bourla, the head of Pfizer, the company that developed one of the vaccines againstcovid-19 . According to the newspaper, they discussed the purchase of 1.8 billion doses of the vaccine for €35 billion for the EU in 2021, and the newspaper suspected the head of the European Commission of "exerting direct influence" on the negotiation process, and that the number of doses purchased may have significantly exceeded needs. The European Commission rejected the NYT's request for correspondence, claiming the requested documents were unavailable, after which the newspaper filed a lawsuit.

That same year, Belgian lobbyist Frédéric Baldan filed a lawsuit against von der Leyen over alleged irregularities in the procurement of vaccines for the EU. According to him, approximately 500 entities, including individuals, political parties, and government officials from two EU member states—Hungary and Poland—joined the lawsuit. The European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) also joined the investigation. However, in January 2025, a court in Liège, Belgium, dismissed Baldan's lawsuit, citing his failure to prove he had suffered "personal harm."

In November 2024 , the European Commission confirmed that the text messages exchanged between von der Leyen and Bourla during the pandemic had not been preserved. The agency emphasized that the correspondence did not discuss the terms of the vaccine procurement contract. "This is what Albert Bourla could have written: 'We need to talk. Okay. 6:00 CET,'" argued European Commission lawyer Miguel Buron Pérez. However, in May 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union sided with the NYT journalists and ruled that the European Commission had violated transparency rules by refusing to grant journalists access to the correspondence between von der Leyen and the Pfizer CEO. According to the court's conclusion, the European Commission's responses regarding the requested text messages were "based either on assumptions or inaccurate information." The court also found convincing the NYT journalists' evidence that the text messages between von der Leyen and Bourla had taken place. However, this decision of the EU Court does not determine the extent of von der Leyen's responsibility and does not imply any disciplinary or criminal measures against her.

In its response, the European Commission (EC) noted that it had taken note of the court's opinion and would soon determine further steps to provide the court with a more detailed explanation for why it did not have the requested documents. Von der Leyen herself did not publicly comment on the Pfizer scandal until the July 7 debate. Notably, on the day of the court's ruling, the European Commission decided to transfer its senior legal adviser, Daniel Calleja i Crespo, to the position of head of the EC's mission in Spain. Politico, in particular, drew attention to this, noting that this coincidence is puzzling. However, the publication's sources denied any connection with the vaccine procurement case.

This isn't the first time von der Leyen has found herself embroiled in a corruption scandal. She was also suspected of embezzlement while serving as Germany's Defense Minister (2013–2019). As head of the European Commission, she was forced to testify before a special committee of the Bundestag, explaining the need for the Defense Ministry's multi-million-euro contracts with external consultants. Previously, auditors from the Federal Audit Office questioned the legality of payments made to private consulting firms McKinsey and Accenture under von der Leyen (the ministry spent €155 million on their services in the first half of 2019 alone). The office also criticized the ministry for mismanaging its funding for a rehabilitation program for Syrian refugees: the Bundeswehr allocated approximately €23,000 per participant, while auditors estimate that similar programs cost only €1,800 per participant. However, the scandal soon fizzled out—the Ministry of Defense showed little interest in clarifying the details of the incident, as Spiegel writes, and von der Leyen no longer worked there.

On July 7, speaking to MEPs in Strasbourg, von der Leyen noted that the initiator of the no-confidence vote, MEP Pieper, was following the example of typical extremists and spreading already debunked conspiracy theories about text messages with only one goal: "to drive a wedge between the pro-European and pro-democratic forces in parliament." The head of the European Commission thanked her opponent for the opportunity to address the facts during this debate and clarify everything. Von der Leyen acknowledged that she had communicated with vaccine manufacturers, but did not name specific companies. "It's no secret that I was in contact with the heads of the vaccine companies—those who could have saved us from the crisis. I also consulted with leading epidemiologists and virologists. "However, any suggestion that the contracts [for the purchase of vaccines] were against Europe's interests is simply a lie," she added, explaining that all of them were discussed and approved at the level of all 27 EU member states. "Any claim that countries were unaware of the contracts, prices, or volumes [of purchases] is simply a lie," von del Leyen concluded.

Regarding the no-confidence vote scheduled for July 10, given the current balance of power in the European Parliament, von der Leyen and her team are unlikely to resign. Last year's European elections resulted in the victory of pro-European forces—the European People's Party (EPP), to which von der Leyen belongs, and the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D). Together, they hold 324 seats in parliament.

Piper said his motion for a vote of no confidence had been supported by 32 members of the ECR faction, as well as independent MPs and representatives of two far-right factions – six signatories from Patriots for Europe (PfE) and 26 from Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN).

Despite the fact that right-wing and far-right forces have significantly increased their representation in the European Parliament in 2024, they are unlikely to succeed in forcing von der Leyen out. As Politico notes, the centrists are not interested in such a development: the liberal Renew Europe faction (77 MEPs) and, most likely, the Greens (53 seats) also plan to vote against dissolving the European Commission, which was formed only six months ago.

The Dutch portal NOS clarifies: although these political forces helped von der Leyen win re-election, their support doesn't mean they admire her performance. "Now centrist forces are watching with alarm as von der Leyen's policies increasingly shift to the right," the outlet explains. This is particularly evident in the crisis of the EU's green initiatives, as well as her refusal to directly criticize Israel for its actions in the Gaza Strip. "In the corridors of the European Commission, the word is that von der Leyen sidelines her commissioners and always makes all the decisions herself. Many MEPs also feel marginalized," NOS concludes.

Incidentally, French President Emmanuel Macron opposed von der Leyen's candidacy for a second term , even discussing her replacement with EU leaders. Von der Leyen also had a very tense relationship with the former head of the European Council, Charles Michel. In his recently published book, current French Prime Minister and former EU chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier criticized von der Leyen for her authoritarianism. He argued that under her leadership, EU commissioners began to act more like "supertechnocrats" than politicians and "don't listen to the people enough."

Nikolai Topornin, DIRECTOR of the Center for European Information, believes that right-wing forces have no chance of securing the support of the center to oust von der Leyen, despite the onslaught of criticism directed at her. "The right itself understands that it lacks the votes. The three main factions in the European Parliament will refuse to support them, in part because it's important for them not to make deals with their right-wing and far-right opponents," the political scientist explained to RBC. In his opinion, there is currently no obvious replacement for von der Leyen.

"Yes, this is a negative episode in von der Leyen's career; after all, not every European Commission faces the threat of a vote of no confidence. On the other hand, nothing has yet affected her fundamental position as President of the European Commission; she continues to enjoy trust," Topornin notes. Disagreements between the European Parliament and the European Commission arise periodically, he continues, but this episode is unlikely to lead to an overt rift. "It's worth noting that the European Commission has recently begun to listen more closely to European Parliament resolutions, which carry no legal force. The European Commission understands that only MEPs can dismiss them, and therefore does not want to enter into conflict with them," the expert concludes.