In his article, “The misunderstood Herr Selmayr,” (March 12) Tim King makes a puzzling analysis about the new secretary-general of the European Commission’s appointment. There is no witch hunt going on. There is only rightful criticism of a Commission that mishandled not only the appointment but also its aftermath.
To begin with, there is absolutely no precedent for the process by which Martin Selmayr was given his new job. Validating the decision will be a major hit to the EU administration’s neutrality in the future. Other appointments will become suspect.
Then there’s the quality of the candidate himself. There is no indication Selmayr has the experience needed to manage some 33,000 people. And while the new secretary-general may be a formidable political player, the EU’s interest is not served by the hyper-politicization of its administration and the establishment of a spoils system.
There is also a huge image problem. How can the public accept the meteoric rise of someone with so little management experience and whose elevation required so much bending of the rules? The commissioners — beginning with Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker — who approved his appointment have been exposed as careless, and their insistence afterward that the appointment was carried out in complete respect of the law looks irresponsible and devious.
In spite of his other achievements, Juncker’s “legacy” will be the destabilization of the whole institution. For the first time since 1952, the appointment of the secretary-general is both legally shaky and widely contested. (See by comparison former Commission President Jacques Delors’ extreme subtlety in appointing David Williamson as secretary-general in 1987.)
The last time the institution was headed by a former prime minister from Luxembourg, Jacques Santer, the term ended in scandal. Allegations of corruption in the institution forced the entire Commission to resign in 1999.
The long-term impact of Selmayr’s installment will be more damaging still. The institution is now wounded at the heart, given that the contested appointment is at the top. The legitimacy of many of the Commission’s initiatives is endangered and its generally strong communication smeared by repeated falsehoods. Most probably, Juncker and the rest of the commissioners won’t have the lucidity to correct the mistake. The Parliament will establish that there were irregularities, but won’t draw the logical conclusion.
Both institutions will be weakened, and populist parties will have been given valuable ammunition to use during the 2019 European Parliament election. With friends like these, Europe doesn’t need enemies.
Franklin Dehousse
Professor at the University of Liège, former special representative of Belgium, former judge at the Court of Justice of the European Union
Brussels, Belgium