EMA was pressured by the EU Commission to approve Covid-vaccines.

Question for written answer to the Commission

Rule 138

Marcel de Graaff (NI), Joachim Kuhs (ID), Bernhard Zimniok (ID)

Subject: EMA was pressured by the Commission to approve Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccines.

Publications suggest that leaked emails reveal that the EMA was pressured by the European

Commission to approve Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccines, despite EMA’s concerns about the safety and (in)effectivity of the vaccines.^[1]

In an email dated 19-11-2020 the former Deputy Executive Director of the EMA, Noël Wathion, openly discussed a tense atmosphere. He mentioned that the European Commission deemed it politically disadvantageous to wait thorough investigations into the vaccines.

A day later, on 20-11-2020, the Commission signed a contract with Pfizer explicitly stating that the vaccine was developed quickly and that its side effects and effectivity are unknown.

1. Does the Commission agree that these leaked emails demonstrate that the in the Covid-19 vaccines process speed has been prioritized over safety and thus the protection of the health of our citizens?
2. Does the Commission acknowledge that it pressured the EMA to approve vaccines without thorough investigations, despite concerns of their ineffectiveness, side effects and lethality?
3. Can the Commission explain why it not only signed a contract with Pfizer a day after receiving the warnings and objections of the EMA concerning the safety of the vaccines but also gave them a full waiver of liability claims?

[1] https://www.nius.de/Corona/jetzt-ermittelt-sogar-der-us-bundesstaat-texas-die-chronik-der-pfizerskandale/2029fe4b-e598-46d8-b82d-0cbce2b8f979