Idag skickade jag ett brev till alla kommissionärer och bad dem avslå Google-beslutet. Kommissionären för konkurrens, Joaquín Almunia, beslutade nämligen förra veckan att godkänna Googles så kallade "frivilliga åtaganden" att inte fortsätta störa konkurrensen på marknaden för söktjänster. Texten i brevet finns återgiven nedan.

Precis som jag tidigare argumenterat i The Register kommer det här försämra förtroendet för de europeiska institutionerna. Kommissionen kan av uppenbara skäl inte åsidosätta sitt viktiga och relevanta uppdrag att upprätthålla ramfördragen bara för att Google tycker att de utvecklas för snabbt. Det finns starka indikationer på att det är de täta kontakterna mellan Almunia och Eric Schmidt som fått kommissionären att vilja avsluta fallet snabbt.

Det luktar obehagligt korruption. Har någon erbjudit ett datacenter i Almunias hemstad i Spanien? Med över 50% arbetslöshet bland unga i Spanien är det en av de högst prioriterade frågorna på dagordningen - kanske till och med högre prioriterad än EU:s konkurrensrätt. Vi kan inte visa att det finns ett sådant erbjudande, men vi vet att ingen är nöjd med Almunias beslut.

Det är fint av både Bildt och Ohlsson att prata om den europeiska tanken i Sverige, men man kan inte sopa problemen i kommissionens maktutövande under mattan. Det kan inte vara så att det enda som behövs för att man ska undvika konkurrensrättsliga utredningar är ett public relations-kontor i Bryssel. Svensk media lyckades förra veckan klämma ur sig två referat från Google-pressreleaser, men kritiken mot beslutet har man undvikit att ta upp.

Dear Honorable President of the European Commission Mr Barroso;

Dear Honorable Commissioners;

Last week on February 5^th 2014, Commissioner Almunia made the announcement that a voluntary settlement agreement has been reached with Google in relation to the investigations into anti-competitive behavior on the search engine market. I write to you with the strongest concerns of how this decision was reached, and what it implies for the trust in the European institutions.

Since his speech at the IBA annual competition conference on 16^th September 2011, Commissioner Almunia has been repeatedly stressing the fast-moving markets in ICT as a reason for closing the case quickly. While it is true that competition investigations take time, I am sure that the Honorable President and all the Commissioners will agree that the treaties should be applied and that the speed of such application, or the speed of ICT innovation, is irrelevant. It appears to me that of the European companies that claim to have suffered for years from the practices that Google stands accused of, few would sympathize with the idea that such an argument as is brought forth by Commissioner Almunia is a reason to not properly investigate Google's conduct.

In response to my parliamentary question E-011600-13 to Commissioner Almunia on October 10^th 2013, the Commissioner opted not to reply to my question as to whether he was rushing the case to get it closed. He also failed to respond whether this rush impeded him from giving the case the close scrutiny it warranted. This refusal to respond to a clear question is worrisome in light of the complaints voiced by both competitors of Google and consumer groups about the decision announced by the Commissioner on February 5^th.

Much attention has been given – thanks in part to the Commissioner himself holding and then issuing press releases about them - to the private meetings between the Commissioner and the Google executive chairman, including commentary on the non-public text message correspondence between the two. My confidence in the Commissioner's judgment is further shaken by criticisms on lack of transparency in the final proceedings from both consumer groups and companies in international press, as well as his unwillingness to discuss the extent to which he has interacted with Eric Schmidt.

The Honorable President and the Commissioners may recall that when the European Commission handed a record fine to Microsoft for engaging in anti-competitive practices, Microsoft had no public affairs offices of their own in Brussels. Google has had an office in Brussels for the duration of the Commission investigation. The European public will wonder whether there is a correlation between these facts.

The circumstances are piling up in an unfortunate way, making it appear as if the Commission may be compromised in its exercise of its duties to uphold the Framework Agreement by the amount of attention a company is able to devote to the responsible Commissioner.

In the run-up to the European Parliament elections of May 2014, Parliament Vice-Presidents Anni Podimata and Othmar Karas compiled information for all the Members about the wide-spread distrust in the European institutions by our own citizens. Never before, with record low turnouts for European Parliament elections and record high poll numbers for Eurosceptic political parties, has the European Commission been less able to afford such an apparently slipshod treatment of such an important investigation. Now more than ever, it should be a priority for all the institutions to ensure the correct application of European Union Framework Agreement and laws.

I call therefore on the Honorable President and the Commissioners not to accept the decision as proposed by Commissioner Almunia. Under the above described circumstances, it should not be acceptable for the Collegium to put this case behind them. The risk of irrevocably damaging the confidence in the institutions of the European Union is too large.

I trust that the Collegium will see the wisdom in ensuring European citizens, enterprises and innovators that the competition articles of the Framework Agreement will be upheld even for very large companies, even in the presence of a public relations office in Brussels, and even if it takes time.

Thank you for your kind attention,

Best regards,

                 Amelia Andersdotter