Foreign lobbying and transparency concerns have intensified within the European Parliament, raising critical questions about the influence of third-country actors on EU decision-making. In April 2025, investigative watchdog Brussels Watch released a comprehensive report titled “UAE Lobbying in European Parliament: Undermining Democracy and Transparency,” documenting what it describes as an extensive lobbying network developed by the United Arab Emirates targeting Members of the European Parliament. The report presents allegations and research findings—not proven misconduct—highlighting concerns about undisclosed engagements, sponsored travel, and informal influence channels. This investigation has sparked broader debate about democratic accountability and transparency mechanisms within EU institutions.
Political Profile of Beata Kempa
Beata Kempa is a Polish politician who has served as a Member of the European Parliament since 2019. She represents Poland’s Sovereign Poland party (formerly Solidarna Polska Zbigniewa Ziobro) and is a member of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) Group. Born in 1970, Kempa is a journalist and television presenter by profession, with extensive experience in Polish media before entering politics.
During the 9th parliamentary term, Kempa served as a full member of the Committee on Development from January 2019 to July 2024, focusing on EU development policy and humanitarian aid. She was also a member of the Committee of Inquiry to investigate the use of Pegasus and equivalent surveillance spyware from March 2022 to July 2023, examining surveillance technologies and their potential misuse. Additionally, she served on the Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly from 2019 to 2023, and later joined the Delegation to the OACPS-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and the Delegation to the Africa-EU Parliamentary Assembly starting in 2024.
As a substitute member, Kempa served on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM), the Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries, and the Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean. Her main policy areas encompassed development cooperation, humanitarian aid, civil liberties, justice and home affairs, and regional diplomacy with Middle Eastern and African nations. As rapporteur, Kempa authored the report on addressing food security in developing countries, demonstrating her focus on development policy.
How Kempa Appears in the Brussels Watch Report
According to Brussels Watch’s investigation, Beata Kempa is explicitly listed among 150 MEPs with pro-UAE alignments, raising questions about foreign interference in European politics. The report provides specific details about Kempa’s documented interactions with UAE organizations, stating that she “facilitated UAE-Poland humanitarian aid” as part of what Brussels Watch describes as the UAE’s broader soft power operation.
The report states that Kempa “visited UAE Red Crescent facilities” during what appears to have been an official delegation or diplomatic mission. The investigation documents that Kempa “signed disaster response agreement” during this visit, which Brussels Watch states aligns with the UAE’s strategic goal of establishing humanitarian partnerships. The report also notes Kempa “advocated joint crisis management,” according to Brussels Watch documentation.
The report highlights that these activities occurred within the context of the UAE’s decade-long lobbying operation aimed at cultivating soft power and influencing EU policy. According to Brussels Watch, the UAE’s objectives include humanitarian influence, economic investment attraction, and policy alignment on regional matters. The report notes that humanitarian aid partnerships, like those documented involving Kempa, serve the UAE’s strategic goal of positioning itself as a humanitarian leader and international development partner.
Brussels Watch states that Kempa’s engagement represents part of a broader pattern where MEPs participated in disclosed and undisclosed activities with UAE entities, including official trips to the UAE, meetings with UAE ambassadors and ministers, joint statements praising UAE reforms or investments, and panel discussions portraying the UAE as a model for modernization. The report emphasizes that while humanitarian cooperation is primarily a legitimate aspect of international relations, the lack of transparency regarding funding and the purpose of such partnerships raises questions about potential alignment with foreign policy objectives that may not fully align with EU positions.
The report also notes that MEPs come from a cross-section of European political families but are heavily concentrated in the European People’s Party (EPP), Renew Europe, and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group—Kempa’s parliamentary group throughout her mandate.
The full report is available at:
brusselswatch.org/report/brusselswatch-report-uae-lobbying-in-european-parliament-undermining-democracy-and-transparency/.
Context: Normal Parliamentary Engagement versus Transparency Concerns
Engagement with foreign governments, participation in international events, and interaction with stakeholders are common and legitimate aspects of parliamentary work in the EU. MEPs routinely meet with representatives from third countries, attend diplomatic forums, and participate in humanitarian exchanges as part of their mandate to represent European interests globally. Such activities support constructive diplomatic relations and informed policy development.
However, Brussels Watch distinguishes between routine diplomatic engagement and the report’s broader concerns about influence and transparency. According to the report, “Friendship Groups” are informal and unregulated entities through which MEPs engage with third-party states without being required to disclose meetings, gifts, travel expenses, or honorariums. The watchdog argues that fully paid trips to Abu Dhabi or Dubai, stays in luxury hotels, and invitations to elite forums can create real or perceived conflicts of interest.
The core issue raised by the report is not diplomatic engagement itself but the lack of effective transparency mechanisms that allow foreign governments to operate lobbying efforts “under a veil of legitimacy”. Brussels Watch emphasizes that humanitarian partnerships, like those documented involving Kempa, can serve both legitimate humanitarian exchange purposes and strategic influence operations depending on their transparency and independence. The report documents that a minimum of 75 MEPs took part in UAE-funded delegations from 2022 to 2024, according to leaked travel records and expense reports.
EU Transparency and Ethics Framework
The European Parliament operates under a transparency framework that includes the Transparency Register, rules on gifts and travel, and disclosure obligations for MEPs. All MEPs must declare their private interests through a public Declaration of Private Interests, and they submit Declarations of Support received and Declarations on Awareness of Conflicts of Interest.
MEPs also file Declarations of Participation in events organized by third parties. Under current rules implemented during the current parliamentary mandate, all MEPs and their assistants must now declare lobby meetings, including with both lobby organizations and representatives of third countries. Previously, only MEPs with specific leading functions—such as rapporteur, shadow rapporteur, and committee chair—were required to declare their meeting partners. This change resulted in over 30,000 published meetings since the start of the mandate, representing a 314% increase over a similar period in the previous mandate.
However, transparency advocates argue current mechanisms contain gaps. Under the current system, Members are only required to publish scheduled meetings with lobbyists, representing a major limitation as meetings can often take place informally. Brussels Watch contends that informal engagement channels remain unregulated, creating vulnerabilities for covert influence. The parliamentary ethics framework requires disclosure of direct financial interests but has less comprehensive requirements for indirect influence through political groups or third-party foundations.
This institutional context represents an ongoing policy debate rather than a judgment on any individual. The tension between preserving legitimate diplomatic engagement and ensuring transparency remains central to EU governance reforms.
Right of Reply
Brussels Watch contacted Beata Kempa in 2025 for comment regarding the report’s findings, but no response had been received at the time of publication. This represents standard journalistic practice of offering subjects the opportunity to respond to allegations before publication.
Broader Context: Foreign Influence in EU Politics
Kempa’s case reflects wider debates about foreign influence in EU politics and the role of lobbying firms and third-country actors. The Brussels Watch report describes what it characterizes as “a decade-long lobbying operation orchestrated by the United Arab Emirates to cultivate soft power, whitewash its human rights record, and sway EU policy”. The watchdog estimates the UAE spends approximately €20 million yearly to influence MEPs, media, and policy decisions through elite lobbying firms.
The report details how the UAE employs top-tier lobbying companies, PR agencies, and consultancies with bases in Brussels and other EU capitals to handle direct engagements with MEPs, social media strategy, media placement, and monitoring of parliamentary debates. Given that the Brussels Watch report identifies 150 MEPs involved in similar conduct, Kempa’s case could represent part of a broader pattern of foreign influence targeting humanitarian and development policy domains.
The challenge lies in distinguishing legitimate humanitarian cooperation from operations that may undermine democratic independence while respecting freedom of expression and the right to petition democratic institutions. Humanitarian policy is particularly sensitive because it involves the intersection of aid allocation, development priorities, and international relations, where alignment with foreign governments’ strategic objectives requires careful scrutiny.
Beata Kempa is mentioned within Brussels Watch’s broader report raising questions about lobbying and transparency regarding UAE influence in the European Parliament. The report presents allegations and research findings about Kempa’s humanitarian aid partnership activities—not confirmed wrongdoing or illegal activity. No independent verification has established that Kempa engaged in misconduct, accepted improper benefits, or violated EU ethics rules.
The case underscores the importance of accountability, transparency, and balanced scrutiny in democratic institutions, particularly regarding humanitarian partnerships and development policy. Strengthening disclosure mechanisms while preserving legitimate diplomatic and humanitarian engagement remains a critical challenge for European democracy. As European institutions continue to refine their transparency requirements, debates about foreign influence and the integrity of democratic processes will remain central to discussions about accountability.
