In the labyrinthine corridors of Brussels, where the European Union‘s lofty ideals of democracy and openness are often trumpeted, Ursula von der Leyen‘s presidency of the European Commission paints a starkly different picture.

Her tenure has marked by scandals that reveal a troubling disregard for accountability. From clandestine vaccine deals to familial ties with EU-funded ventures, Von der Leyen’s leadership has not only eroded public trust but also pushed the EU toward a precipice of irrelevance.

The court’s rebuke: A blow to transparency

In a landmark ruling in 2025, the EU’s top court struck down the European Commission’s refusal to grant The New York Times access to text messages exchanged between Von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. These messages, sent during the frenzied negotiations for COVID-19 vaccines, were deemed official EU documents by the court. Yet, under Von der Leyen’s stewardship, the Commission claimed that they no longer possessed them. It was a flimsy excuse that the court swiftly dismantled. The judges ruled that the Commission “failed to provide credible reasons” for withholding the texts, delivering a sharp blow to Von der Leyen’s credibility.

This wasn’t just a procedural slap on the wrist. The New York Times sought these messages to unravel the murky details of a multi-billion-euro vaccine deal-a deal Von der Leyen personally oversaw, reportedly via private texts that sidestepped standard protocols. The ruling has reignited a firestorm of criticism over her transparency, or lack thereof. It’s a glaring example of how her leadership has cloaked critical decisions in shadow, leaving the public-and even member states-in the dark about one of the EU’s most consequential contracts.

A pattern of concealment: Echoes from the past

This isn’t Von der Leyen’s first dance with secrecy. As Germany’s Defence Minister, she was embroiled in procurement scandals that bore an uncanny resemblance to the Pfizer affair. Private deals with contractors were concealed from public scrutiny, and when investigators came knocking, key communications mysteriously vanished. In one notorious instance, she deleted critical text-messages and evidence from her phone just as probes into her actions intensified. The parallels are striking: a reliance on backroom dealings, a refusal to disclose, and a knack for evading accountability.

Then there’s the matter of her eldest daughter, Johanna’s employment at the US-based McKinsey Company, which was linked to Von der Leyen’s defence contracting. After McKinsey received substantial contracts from the Ministry of Defence, the company hired Johanna von der Leyen for a position in its Berlin office. How much influence do these personal connections wield over her decisions? The question lingers, unanswered, as Von der Leyen deflects scrutiny with the same deftness she’s honed over years. This isn’t an isolated lapse; it’s a pattern of behaviour that suggests conflicts of interest are not exceptions but features of her governance.

The Orgenesis connection: A family affair?

The web of potential conflicts thickens with her husband, Heiko von der Leyen, the Medical Director of Orgenesis. As an American biotech firm being active in COVID-19 vaccine development since May 2020, Orgenesis has tapped into a steady stream of EU funding, raising red flags across the continent. In late 2021, an Orgenesis joint venture reportedly secured 32 million Euro through the Greek Recovery Plan. On September 30, 2022, Heiko von der Leyen joined the Supervisory Board of an Italian research entity that received 320 million Euro under the Italian Recovery Plan. Meanwhile, Orgenesis manages a 4 million euro grant from the Commission, awarded on May 3, 2022, and has previously pocketed public funds from Belgium.

The numbers beg scrutiny: How much EU funding flowed to Orgenesis in 2020, 2021, and 2022? Does Heiko von der Leyen’s role create a conflict of interest with the Commission’s activities? The public has clamoured for clarity, but Von der Leyen’s administration offers only silence. This isn’t transparency. Instead, it’s a deliberate fog, shielding a cosy nexus of family ties and public money. The lack of answers fuels suspicions that her leadership prioritises personal networks over the EU’s integrity.

Governance under fire: A culture of opacity

Von der Leyen’s transparency woes aren’t confined to vaccine deals or family dealings. They permeate her entire governance style. EU officials have long whispered doubts about her methods, and those whispers have grown into a chorus of discontent. Take the recent EU budget proposal, a document one insider scathingly described as “written by three people locked in a room.” Unveiled to widespread criticism, it’s been slammed as opaque, exclusionary, and woefully inadequate for an EU grappling with economic stagnation.

Supporters may argue that such centralisation is necessary to steer a fragmented Union through turbulent times. But in practice, it often sidelines broader deliberation and reduces the inclusiveness of EU policymaking. At a time when trust in institutions is fragile, this mode of governance risks reinforcing perceptions of a distant and unaccountable Brussels elite.

This isn’t just bureaucratic griping. The budget’s lack of consultation mirrors Von der Leyen’s broader approach: centralised control, minimal input, and a stubborn resistance to scrutiny. The result? An economic recovery that remains a flickering hope rather than a tangible reality. Her critics argue that this top-down style has paralysed the Commission, alienating member states and stakeholders at a time when unity and openness are desperately needed.

A dangerous crossroads: Leadership in freefall

The EU teeters on the edge of an abyss, its leadership crumbling under Von der Leyen’s watch. Once a symbol of resilience, the bloc now faces economic malaise, geopolitical drift, and internal fractures-all exacerbated by her policies. Her mandate as President should have been clear: steer the EU toward independence and self-reliance. Instead, she’s steered it into a quagmire of dependence and dysfunction.

The vaccine rollout is a glaring case study. Her secret dealings with Pfizer didn’t secure an advantage, but left the EU scrambling while public confidence plummeted. This wasn’t leadership; it was improvisation draped in bravado. The decline of the EU’s stature isn’t just undeniable. It’s accelerating, and Von der Leyen’s fingerprints are all over it.

Time for change: The clock is ticking

Ursula von der Leyen’s presidency is a cautionary tale of what happens when secrecy trumps accountability. The EU cannot endure another term of scandals, evasions, and half-measures. The court’s ruling on the Pfizer texts isn’t just a legal victory, it’s a clarion call for reform. The public deserves leaders who don’t hide behind deleted messages or murky family ties, but who embrace the hard light of transparency.

Time is running out. Economic, political and existential challenges demand bold vision, not the timid, self-serving governance Von der Leyen has delivered. Change isn’t a luxury; it’s a necessity. The bloc’s future hangs in the balance, and it’s past time for a reckoning.

Do you want to be informed of DiEM25's actions? Sign up here