I. Institutional and Legal Framework of OLAF Investigations The first cases after the establishment of OLAF confirmed and clarified its status and function and stipulated that the requirement of independence is closely related to strict observance of the Community law. In the Rothley1 case, the European courts agreed that the European Parliament Decision concerning the terms and conditions for internal investigations2 applies to objectively defined situations and has legal effects with respect to categories of persons envisaged generally and in the abstract, i.e. present or future Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), but also all the Parliament's staff members, whether… Read more

In case T-48/05, the European Court of First Instance (CFI) ruled on an application for compensation for material and non-material damage sustained as a consequence of errors alleged to have been committed by the European Commission and OLAF in investigating the “Eurostat” case. The CFI ordered the European Commission to pay Mr. Yves Franchet and Mr. Daniel Byk the sum of 56 000 Euros and ordered the Commission to pay the costs.1 The Commission decided not to appeal. Three aspects of the ruling that are highlighted in this article relate to the presumption of innocence (I below), the right of… Read more

I. General Framework 1. Introduction The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is merely an administrative investigative service but its work extends into a particularly sensitive area: criminal justice. OLAF is to forward to the judicial authorities of the Member State concerned information obtained by the Office during internal investigations into matters liable to result in criminal proceedings.1 Reports drawn up by OLAF on the basis of its investigations constitute admissible evidence in judicial proceedings in the same way and under the same conditions as administrative reports drawn up by national administrative inspectors.2 Under these circumstances, it is obvious that OLAF’s communication… Read more

The article addresses the successes and deficiencies of OLAF. The European Commission created OLAF in 1999. In ten years, the Office was able to establish itself as a truly independent investigation service at the disposal of the European Institutions and the Member States with the objective of protecting the financial interests of the European Union. The challenge of creating an efficient, independent investigation service was taken up. At every moment, it has been a fight which has to continue in the future by improving the functioning of the Office and by unceasingly adapting it to the new realities of the European integration.

I. Introduction When the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) was created in 1999, it was in a context of determination that criminal behaviour to the detriment of the financial interests of the European Communities should face decisive reaction, but the focus was upon the creation of a body which was conclusively administrative in nature.1 Although the need to address behaviour viewed as harmful and to prevent such behaviour in the future was strongly outlined, the methods chosen to achieve this were explicitly of this regulatory nature. One was not, however, blind to the nature of the territory to which OLAF’s work… Read more