European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has been sued for defamation by Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea amid ongoing political tensions in the European Parliament. The lawsuit centers on comments made by von der Leyen during a no-confidence debate in July 2025, where she accused MEPs, including Piperea, of spreading conspiracy theories and labeling them as “Putin’s friends” and “extremists.” These remarks came in response to a motion of no-confidence that Piperea led, challenging von der Leyen’s leadership over secret communications she had with Pfizer’s CEO in 2021. Despite von der Leyen surviving the vote, the conflict has escalated into legal action.
Background: The No-Confidence Motion and Political Context
The no-confidence motion was launched by Gheorghe Piperea, a Romanian MEP affiliated with the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and nationalist party Alliance for the Unification of Romanians. He spearheaded a campaign citing von der Leyen’s undisclosed messages exchanged with Albert Bourla, the CEO of pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, as grounds for mistrust. The motion gathered enough signatures to be formally tabled but was ultimately rejected in mid-July.
Von der Leyen’s response during the parliamentary debate struck a harsh tone. She accused the signatories of being politically motivated extremists linked to Russian interests, claiming they propagated conspiracy theories. The President’s center-right allies, including EPP leader Manfred Weber, echoed the sentiment, describing the motion’s supporters as “puppets of Putin.”
This rhetoric has prompted Piperea to escalate matters legally, asserting that he and others were unfairly smeared. He alleges that the European Commission, through its spokesperson, endorsed her claims, which he argues has damaged his reputation and political work within the European Parliament.
Piperea’s Claims and Legal Action
In the filed lawsuit at the EU Court of Justice, Gheorghe Piperea demands a formal apology and moral damages for what he describes as baseless and politically motivated defamation. He stated,
“Such claims are not only completely unfounded, but also damaging to my reputation and political activity as an elected representative of the European people.”
Piperea asserts that linking him to Russian propaganda undermines his credibility and unfairly taints his political stance.
The Court of Justice has yet to rule on the admissibility of the defamation case, but the development marks a significant moment of confrontation between an influential MEP and the Commission president. The European Commission has declined to comment publicly on the lawsuit, maintaining a cautious stance as the legal process unfolds.
Political Fallout and Upcoming Challenges for von der Leyen
The lawsuit against von der Leyen is happening amidst a turbulent period in the European Parliament. She is set to face two additional confidence votes in October 2025: one led by the far-right group Patriots for Europe and the other by the Parliamentary Left. These moves reflect a broader political unease about her leadership and transparency regarding the so-called ‘Pfizergate’ scandal, which raised questions about undisclosed communications with the pharmaceutical industry during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Piperea’s lawsuit underscores the rising tension and polarization within EU politics. His motion and subsequent defamation claim challenge von der Leyen’s leadership style and her approach to addressing criticism, particularly from right-wing and nationalist factions. It also highlights growing scrutiny of the Commission President’s conduct, especially concerning transparency and accountability.
Broader Implications for European Commission Leadership
The dispute presents a test case for how elected officials in the European Parliament interact with the Commission and hold its president accountable. Defamation claims involving political figures in such high-profile positions are rare and closely watched, as they can influence parliamentary dynamics and public perceptions of governance in Brussels.
Von der Leyen’s survival of the initial no-confidence vote did not quell opposition voices. The two upcoming motions scheduled in October reflect mounting pressure from different political spectrums and show that von der Leyen’s grip on power remains contested.
A Legal and Political Showdown
The defamation lawsuit filed by Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea against Ursula von der Leyen represents both a legal and political confrontation in Europe’s highest institutions. Allegations of defamatory remarks linking Piperea and other MEPs to Russian propaganda have led to a formal legal process that could have lasting repercussions on the stability and conduct within the European Commission and Parliament.
As the EU’s political landscape continues to shift, von der Leyen faces what may be the most challenging phase of her presidency yet, with legal battles and confidence votes testing her leadership resolve and political future.
