The organization shared the original tip related to that open letter signed by eight MEPs with OLAF, which subsequently dismissed it due to “insufficient suspicions.”
“[G]iven we had also raised this bilaterally in a meeting we had with [Itälä] on the 20th of Dec. 2022, they had the ability to reach out to us to seek more info,” Aiossa said in a written response.
Itälä now wants to focus on proving OLAF’s relevance in the ever-changing landscape of European anti-corruption efforts. For example, he said, OLAF reports are not public, due to legal constraints; he admitted the lack of transparency was a risk. A supervisory committee is currently checking that the watchdog is not investigating parties only on one side of the political spectrum.
Nearly two years after OLAF dismissed the Huawei tip, Belgian prosecutors are investigating whether the company made illegal payments to have an open letter written and signed by eight European lawmakers in support of its interests. | Sean Gallup/Getty Images
But the institution has growing concerns about competition with the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), a new watchdog in the EU anti-fraud world, sometimes sparking friction between the two.
In a hearing at the Parliament, European Chief Prosecutor Laura Codruța Kövesi criticized OLAF’s contributions to detecting criminal cases within the bloc. “The level of cooperation is very low with OLAF,” Kövesi said of the partnership.
That’s not how Itälä sees it.
“I was a bit surprised she did not call me before making those public remarks. This is not the right thing to do. We have 25 years of experience and have always favored cooperation,” he said.
CORRECTED: This story has been amended to correct the date of the meeting between Transparency International and Itälä.