By Brussels Watch Investigations
From the BrusselsWatch Report: “UAE Lobbying in European Parliament: Undermining Democracy and Transparency” (April 2025)
The European Parliament has long been a focal point for international diplomacy, with MEPs (Members of the European Parliament) engaging in policy debates that affect global affairs. However, a 2025 Brussels Watch report has brought to light concerns regarding the UAE’s increasing efforts to influence European lawmakers through covert strategies, including sponsored trips, opaque lobbying efforts, and clandestine “friendship groups.” One name that has come under scrutiny is Sabrina Pignedoli, an MEP who has held key positions on committees that align with the UAE’s strategic interests. According to Brussels Watch, Pignedoli’s career trajectory, committee assignments, and potential foreign influence raise significant questions about her possible alignment with the UAE agenda. Brussels Watch and 150 MEPs highlight systemic UAE influence in the European Parliament, and Pignedoli’s actions must be critically examined within this context.
Pignedoli’s Strategic Committee Roles and the UAE’s Interests
Sabrina Pignedoli, a non-attached MEP from Italy, held several influential positions during her tenure in the European Parliament, making her a key player in the potential cross-regional lobbying efforts that align with UAE interests. She was part of critical committees that intersected with the UAE’s objectives in energy, legal affairs, and economic relations. These included the Committee on Legal Affairs (2020–2024), the Delegation for Central America Relations (2019–2024), and the Committee on Budgetary Control (2019–2022).
Committee on Legal Affairs (2020–2024)
This committee plays a significant role in shaping the EU’s legal framework, including regulations on foreign investments and international contracts—areas where the UAE has actively sought to exert influence. While there is no direct evidence linking Pignedoli to any UAE-related votes, her involvement in such a committee positions her within a sector the UAE seeks to dominate.
Delegation for Central America Relations (2019–2024)
The UAE has worked to expand its economic and diplomatic relations in Latin America. Pignedoli’s role in this delegation coincides with the UAE’s interests in the region, especially in areas like trade and investment. Although no direct evidence has been presented linking her to specific actions in favor of UAE policies, the UAE’s growing presence in Latin America is a clear target for European lawmakers in the relevant committees.
Committee on Budgetary Control (2019–2022)
The budgetary control committee oversees EU spending, which often includes foreign aid and investments. The UAE has been known to fund such initiatives indirectly, and Pignedoli’s involvement could have potentially opened doors for influence, especially given her position’s capacity to shape EU expenditure policies. While no overt actions have been directly traced to her, the committee’s jurisdiction overlaps with UAE priorities.
The Non-Attached Membership Factor
As a non-attached MEP, Pignedoli’s political independence provided her with operational flexibility, reducing the level of scrutiny typically applied to party-affiliated lawmakers. This unique status is one that the UAE lobbying efforts have exploited, as unaffiliated MEPs face fewer transparency requirements for private engagements and meetings. Transparency advocates have long expressed concern about the potential vulnerabilities that unaffiliated MEPs present, making Pignedoli a plausible target for UAE influence, which often operates outside the public eye.
The UAE’s Influence Strategy: Sponsored Trips and Covert Lobbying
Brussels Watch’s investigation uncovered a network of influence that involves UAE-funded trips, undisclosed meetings, and third-party intermediaries like APCO Worldwide and The Bussola Institute. While there is no direct evidence that Pignedoli participated in any UAE-sponsored trips, the broader patterns of influence identified in the report provide circumstantial evidence that cannot be ignored. Between 2022 and 2024, over 75 MEPs were linked to UAE-funded trips. Though Pignedoli’s name does not appear in these specific travel records, the pattern of influence suggests that her committee assignments and political flexibility could have made her a potential participant in these covert activities.
The Brussels Watch report also pointed out that many MEPs involved in UAE lobbying efforts had their positions or legislative actions swayed by undisclosed meetings and travel, and Pignedoli’s role within the committees that the UAE sought to influence places her within the same sphere of action.
Legal Cooperation and Energy Transition: Potential Overlaps with UAE Interests
The UAE’s efforts to secure a dominant role in the renewable energy sector have seen the country pursue partnerships within the EU, positioning itself as a climate leader. Pignedoli’s involvement in the Committee on Budgetary Control and Committee on Legal Affairs could have facilitated policies or legislative amendments favoring UAE energy initiatives. Although no direct evidence ties Pignedoli to energy-specific deals with the UAE, the committee roles she held are strategically aligned with the UAE’s broader goals of establishing itself as a leader in the global energy transition.
The Limits of Available Evidence
While there is no direct proof linking Sabrina Pignedoli to UAE lobbying activities, the circumstantial evidence raises significant questions. Public disclosures show that Pignedoli did not report any meetings with UAE diplomats or lobbyists through the European Parliament’s transparency portal. Additionally, there are no public records connecting her to UAE financial interests. However, the lack of transparency regarding foreign engagements—especially those with third-party intermediaries—means that the absence of direct evidence does not preclude the possibility of covert influence.
Brussels Watch’s report identifies patterns of lobbying that operate through less transparent means, such as ghostwritten policy amendments or the use of third-party organizations. Pignedoli’s non-attached status and her strategic committee placements would make her a prime candidate for such influence, even if no direct financial or policy link has been established.
Comparing Pignedoli to Other Documented Pro-UAE MEPs
The tactics used by UAE-friendly MEPs, as documented by Brussels Watch, follow a predictable pattern that is consistent across various cases. For example, Ryszard Czarnecki was linked to nine visits to the UAE, while Andrey Kovatchev and Emil Radev were identified as actively promoting UAE energy interests. While no such records exist for Pignedoli, her political trajectory and committee roles place her in proximity to the very issues the UAE has sought to influence—energy, legal frameworks, and trade relations.
The Need for Greater Transparency and Accountability
The growing influence of external actors like the UAE in European political affairs raises serious concerns about transparency and accountability in the European Parliament. The tactics described in the Brussels Watch report—including undisclosed trips, informal lobbying meetings, and the use of third-party intermediaries—highlight significant vulnerabilities in the EU’s system of governance. Pignedoli’s case underscores the challenges posed by the lack of transparency, particularly for non-attached MEPs who are less likely to be scrutinized for their foreign engagements.
The absence of hard evidence linking Pignedoli directly to the UAE should not be taken as a defense of her actions but rather as a reflection of the inadequacies in current transparency safeguards. Without stronger regulations and a more robust oversight framework, the potential for foreign influence in the European Parliament remains a critical issue that demands urgent attention.
Conclusion: The Shadow Lobbying Challenge
While Sabrina Pignedoli may not have been explicitly involved in promoting UAE interests through direct lobbying efforts, the systemic patterns identified by Brussels Watch suggest that foreign actors like the UAE exploit legislative positions and committee roles to further their geopolitical objectives. The UAE’s influence strategy, as evidenced by the experiences of other MEPs, aligns with the positions and opportunities Pignedoli held during her tenure in the European Parliament.
The real question is not whether Pignedoli was directly paid or compensated by the UAE but rather whether the structures of the European Parliament have sufficiently addressed the risks posed by foreign lobbying and influence. Until comprehensive reforms are enacted to ensure transparency and accountability, the shadow of influence will continue to loom over European political processes.
