The Malta-based European Asylum Support Office has had its 2017 accounts rejected by the European Parliament, with MEPs echoing the failing grade the European Court of Auditors gave the agency last year.
MEPs voted overwhelmingly to refuse approval of EASO’s 2017 accounts by 694 votes to two against, with a further two abstentions.
That decision was based on the European Court of Auditors’ report on 2017 accounts of the EU’s various agencies, which expressed alarm at shortcomings inside the Malta-based agency.
The EU’s auditors had said EASO’s human resources situation had “deteriorated exponentially” and that the agency demonstrated a “systematic” non-compliance with accounting and public procurement rules.
They found problems in the way the agency was operating across the board, from the way in which it had leased its Marsa headquarters to its failure to properly document travel expenses, payments to legal firms or even cleaning service fees.
In 2017, EASO had a €79 million budget, up from €53 million the previous year. Auditors calculated that around €7.7 million in payments EASO made that year breached EU rules.
EASO, which became operational in 2011, seeks to support member states in processing asylum applications and help them handle individual asylum cases coherently.
It is the only EU agency headquartered in Malta and has endured a tough few years.
In 2017, it was the only EU agency out of 41 to be given an adverse opinion by the court of auditors, repeating a damning verdict it had also been given in 2016.
That year, Times of Malta had reported that the agency was in disarray and being investigated by the EU’s anti-fraud office, OLAF, with investigations focused primarily on the agency’s then-boss, José Carreira.
Mr Carreira stepped down in June 2018 and MEPs on Wednesday stressed that EASO appeared to have turned a corner under current management, improving its administration and undertaking “ambitious reforms”.
However, they noted that they could not approve the agency’s 2017 accounts, given the extent of irregularities highlighted by EU auditors during that year.
“This Parliament cannot make compromises regarding good governance and sound management of the EU budget and refusing discharge is the only way forward", said MEP Petri Savarmaa, who steered the drafting of MEPs’ position on the issue.
A refusal to discharge is the European Parliament’s way of refusing to endorse an agency’s accounts.
EASO was not the only EU body which received a failing grade by MEPs: for the 10th consecutive year, MEPs also declined to discharge the budget of the EU Council, due to an ongoing dispute over the European Parliament’s authority to review and approve its accounts.