Gheorghe Piperea accuses Ursula von der Leyen of defamation

Since he did not receive any response from the European Commission within the deadline requested - namely July 31 - Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea has decided to take Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, to court for defamation, the website brusselssignal.eu announced in a press article published yesterday.

According to Belgian journalists, it is an unprecedented gesture, which shakes the institutional balance of the European Union to its foundations and marks a harsh legal response to what Piperea considers to be an attempt to compromise political opponents through toxic labels and unfounded accusations. The cited source shows that Gheorghe Piperea, a European deputy from AUR/ECR, is determined to open two separate actions: a civil one, at the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg, for non-contractual tortious liability, and a criminal one, at the Criminal Court in Strasbourg, for defamation, under French law, where, unlike Luxembourg, there is no ceiling for damages awarded.

"The seven-day deadline that I granted Ursula von der Leyen and the European Commission to present concrete evidence that the censure motion of July 7, 2025 was the "work of Moscow' has expired. I will initiate legal action for tortious liability against the European Commission, and a criminal complaint for defamation will be filed directly against Ursula von der Leyen at the Strasbourg court,” Gheorghe Piperea declared, according to the cited source.

We recall that the entire scandal was triggered by the public statements of the President of the European Commission, who, in a speech delivered in the plenary of the European Parliament, insinuated that the censure motion initiated by Gheorghe Piperea was supported by "puppets from Moscow” and that the MEPs involved were "extremists” who "erode trust in democracy with false claims about interference in the elections”.

Gheorghe Piperea claims, according to the cited source, that this strategy of demonizing the opposition is not only tendentious, but also deeply dangerous for the future of European democracy: "In her speech on July 7, she stated that the European Commission is under attack, equating criticism of her personally with being a "friend of Putin”. This is unacceptable. She cannot put us on the same level as Lukashenko just because we oppose his policies”.

Moreover, Mr. Piperea warns of an increasingly authoritarian tendency at the top of the Commission: "Unfortunately for European democracy, von der Leyen has confused her temporary political position with the institution she represents. The position of President of the Commission is not eternal and is not immune to criticism. The confusion between the person and the institution seriously affects the democratic integrity of the EU.”

He told the cited source that this is not an isolated case, but a repetitive behavior on the part of Ursula von der Leyen, including the way she "crossed the red line” in negotiations with former US President Donald Trump, in the context of the controversial trade agreement of July 27. The MEP states that many citizens of the Union are "deeply dissatisfied” with such gestures and that, in the absence of a firm legal response, this type of behavior will continue unhindered.

Piperea added that several MEPs who signed the censure motion will join her as plaintiffs, and the amount of compensation requested will be substantial, intended to have a deterrent effect. Even though von der Leyen benefits from a form of institutional immunity, Gheorghe Piperea believes that this was overcome by the public insult brought to some elected Europeans, which could attract personal liability.

Also yesterday, the daily Il Giornale d'Italia showed in an article that Ursula von der Leyen has finally given in to the European justice in the "Pfizergate” scandal, giving up challenging the sentence that obliges her to make public the messages exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, regarding the acquisition of 1.8 billion doses of the Covid-19 vaccine.

The legal deadline for appealing against the ruling by the General Court of the European Union has expired, and the European Commission has decided not to pursue the appeal, thus implicitly confirming the lack of transparency found by the court. The case, triggered by a lawsuit by the American daily The New York Times, concerns part of the 35 billion euro contract signed without public consultation or access to essential documents. According to Italian journalists, this withdrawal is perceived as a tacit admission of the political and moral guilt of the Commission head, even if technical access to the messages in question remains difficult. The EU Court ruled that von der Leyen must provide "legitimate access to documents”, reaffirming the fundamental principle of institutional transparency. A spokesperson of the European Commission promised a "detailed explanation” regarding the absence of the requested documents, but insisted that the transparency policy "has not been questioned.”