No novo episódio do podcast TransformaGov, conversamos com Atli Stannard, conselheiro na Convigton & Burling LLP sobre Regulamentação do Lobby na União Europeia: Transparência, Compliance e Lições para o Brasil.
O podcast TransformaGov é produzido pelo IRELGOV em parceria com a ESPM.
Ouça o episódio em: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2vTLI6fM8YozoQ2pRBIXEu
Confira a transcrição completa abaixo:
Fernando Moraes
Welcome, Atli. So, there is a first question. How is lobbying of the EU institutions regulated? What are its main obligations? Does it go beyond transparency requirements?
Atli Stannard
Thanks, Fernando, and it’s a real pleasure for me to be with you today.
Lobbying in the EU—and I’m talking about the EU level as opposed to Member State level—is regulated by an interinstitutional agreement. That’s an agreement between the various EU institutions: Commission, Council, and Parliament. That agreement includes a code of conduct. So, anyone who wants to have meetings with the institutions effectively needs to sign up to the code of conduct and, therefore, comes under the various obligations of the Transparency Register. That’s the very basics.
Now, the scope of the EU rules is very broad. Anything that’s done with the intention to affect policymaking or decision-making of the EU institutions is covered by the EU lobbying transparency framework, unless it’s part of an established administrative procedure—like a merger control case before DG Competition. That’s the clearest carve-out from the rules. But anything else you do that aims to influence the EU institutions is covered by the Register.
As for the obligations on those who are registered, they are relatively limited. It’s essentially about transparency. You have to disclose when you speak to members of the EU institutions on behalf of a client, who that client is, or, if you’re an organization or a company yourself, that you’re representing your own entity. For example, if you’re an in-house lobbyist, you must disclose that.
You also have to make an annual return to the Transparency Register, disclosing your spend on “covered activities”—all the work that’s in scope of the register. If you’re an intermediary, you have to disclose all of your clients and keep that registration up to date over time. That’s the essential framework.
Interestingly, the biggest compliance burden in the EU system actually falls on the officials, who are required to record all meetings they have with people registered under the Transparency Register. So, you get this balance: transparency by the registrants, and the officials having to record the direct interactions. It’s a relatively good system both for business and effective transparency.
Thomaz D’Addio
Atli, could you tell us a bit more about how this Transparency Register is enforced in the EU, and who oversees this enforcement? Is there any specific regulator? If you could go into more detail about the system.
Atli Stannard
Yeah, of course. It’s a regulator… I should probably take a step back. The Transparency Register is administered by a Secretariat that sits within the Commission—specifically, within the Secretariat General.
They ensure new registrations are complete and make sense before being added to the Register. They conduct spot checks of registrations and respond to complaints about missing or inaccurate information. This Secretariat has expanded over the years, but it’s still a small team dealing with over 16,000 registrants. That’s effectively the regulator, if there is one.
It’s worth noting, though, that the system is more focused on gathering and disclosing information than on punishing those who fail to register properly. Yes, there are punitive elements if someone is obviously trying to circumvent the rules. But generally, the Secretariat’s job is to engage with registrants to ensure their registration is complete and accurate. If you’re cooperative and open, updates to your registration are usually enough to address concerns.
Now, there have been cases of alleged impropriety. For instance, there’s an ongoing case involving Huawei, which Belgian authorities have accused of criminal conduct. As a result, Huawei was stripped of the benefits granted under the Transparency Register—such as access to institutions, entry passes to the European Parliament, and the right to meet officials above a certain rank. But that’s a pretty exceptional case.
Thomaz D’Addio
In general, Atli, how did the business community react to the Transparency Act? How was it received?
Atli Stannard
The Transparency Register is important to those of us who work in public affairs and policy in Brussels. My sense is that the industry is generally supportive of it. Public affairs bodies and industry groups have expressed public support and are themselves registered. So, I’d say it’s a relatively balanced system that works well for businesses engaging with EU institutions. And I believe the Commission views it as effective too.
Also, it’s important to mention that the Transparency Register changes over time. It’s due for a review later this year, so we’ll have to wait and see what the institutions decide for future revisions.
Thomaz D’Addio
We’ve seen that the Transparency Register came into force in 2014, with a revision in 2022. How does this revision process work? What changed? Could you share any lessons learned?
Atli Stannard
Absolutely. The 2022 revision mainly increased the levels of disclosure. But actually, one of the most impactful changes wasn’t a rule change—it was a shift in practice by the European Commission. That shows how the rules are just one part of a broader array of practices that promote transparency.
You’re right: the revised interinstitutional agreement was adopted in 2021 and came into force in 2022, replacing the 2014 version. Recently, the Commission significantly expanded the list of officials who must record meetings with registered entities and who are prohibited from meeting unregistered entities. Previously, this applied only to Commissioners, their immediate cabinets, and Directors General. Now, it extends to Heads of Unit.
That’s a major change, because it reaches officials at the most granular levels—those listed in the institutional directory—and they’re now subject to reporting rules. They can’t meet with unregistered people.
I think that’s a good thing—transparency is a good thing—but it also means more work for those inside the institutions.
There haven’t been dramatic effects from the latest update yet, but structurally, it’s significant. There’s also a scheduled review clause, due by July this year. So, we may see further changes.
Thomaz D’Addio
From a Brazilian perspective, when we look at the FCPA, there’s a perception that lawyers used this as an entry into public affairs by claiming client privilege and avoiding disclosure. How does the EU Transparency Register handle legal advice?
Atli Stannard
First, I should say I’m not an FCPA expert. In the US, we register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act, and some of my colleagues are registered under FARA for specific clients. So, yes, lawyers in the US do face registration obligations.
In the EU, the Transparency Register allows an exception for independent legal advice—like compliance advice. But I’m a lawyer, and I represent clients in public policy matters. The work I do that falls under the Register is disclosable.
You must agree with the client in advance that you will disclose your work—that’s a matter of bar rules. If the client refuses to allow it, the lawyer shouldn’t be doing that work.
If there’s a conflict between our duty to maintain client confidentiality and our obligation to disclose under the Transparency Register, it’s up to us to resolve it. We can’t just hide behind client privilege to avoid our obligations.
So, ultimately, as long as you’re clear with clients that your work is covered by the Register and get their consent to disclose, there shouldn’t be a conflict. If you can’t disclose, don’t do the covered activities.
Thomaz D’Addio
Do EU member states have their own lobbying regulation, or do they rely on the EU-level regulation? How is harmonization done?
Atli Stannard
In basic terms, there’s no real harmonization. Various member states have their own lobbying registration schemes. They vary significantly. I’m not an expert in all of them, but we’ve advised on some individually.
There’s no link between national regimes and the EU-level Register. So, if you’re engaging with national and EU decision-makers, you must check and comply with both national and EU regulations.
Thomaz D’Addio
To close our very interesting podcast today, do you have any good practices or recommendations from the EU that could be useful for Brazilian regulation?
Atli Stannard
Yes, absolutely. There are two sets of lessons: one for designing the transparency framework and another for those engaging in lobbying.
On the system side, the EU approach is relatively proportionate. Registrants must register and stay up to date, but the responsibility for disclosing meetings lies with policymakers. That’s manageable for industry and ensures clarity and accountability.
The Secretariat focuses on improving disclosure quality, not punishing mistakes. That’s valuable. There are no criminal penalties for honest errors—registration can be tricky, but the system encourages working with the Secretariat to fix mistakes. That’s a strength of the EU system.
For registrants, transparency isn’t a bad thing—it’s a good one. It’s important for everyone to know who’s engaged in policymaking. For companies and professionals alike, it’s a matter of reputation to get your registration right.
And from what I see, there’s no real concern in the industry about the EU scheme. Compliance is generally strong in Brussels.
Thomaz D’Addio
Atli, I’d like to thank you very much for your time and for speaking with us on this podcast for Irelgov.
As we’ve mentioned, in Brazil we are currently discussing regulation for transparency and lobbying. Learning from other countries is essential, and your collaboration was very valuable. Thank you very much, Atli.
Atli Stannard
Thank you. It’s been a pleasure.
Fernando Moraes
Thank you very much.