This investigation is ongoing. The formal request for access to documents filed today will be updated here as responses arrive. All institutional responses are published verbatim at brussels-leaks.eu/the-record/.
Table 1 — Fraud suspicion intake by country. Published every year until 2018. From 2019 onward, under a new Director-General, the table was gone. No note, no legal basis, no replacement.
I filed a formal request for access to documents to find out what that data showed for 2019–2024. It took six months, a Commission Secretariat-General intervention, a director general change and an institutional escalation. OLAF finally released the numbers on 13 May 2026.
Belgium: 975 cases of investigative interest. The highest of any EU member state. 36.1% of all EU cases.
That is the number OLAF chose not to publish for six consecutive years.
Table 2 — Cases sent to EPPO per country. Published from 2021 to 2024. These are not fraud suspicions, these are cases OLAF considered criminally liable, serious enough to refer to the EU’s Public Prosecutor, who has clear geographical mandates.
| Year | Belgium sent to EPPO | Belgium’s rank |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 30 cases | 1st in EU |
| 2022 | 23 cases | 1st in EU |
| 2023 | 7 cases | 4th |
| 2024 | 21 cases | 1st in EU |
| 2025 | ? | TABLE DELETED |
OLAF’s 2025 Annual Report, published 20 April 2026, does not contain this table. No explanation, just gone.
Why does Belgium receive disproportionate treatment?
These two-now missing tables show clearly that the European anti-fraud office is not working proportionately. Not to the incoming fraud suspicions, not to the funding received.
The one country-level table OLAF has never removed is the concluded investigations table. It has consistently shown Belgium near the bottom, always Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary first.
After a six-month formal request for access to documents battle, OLAF disclosed: Belgium – 4 concluded OLAF investigations across the entire decade 2014–2023. On EUR 31 billion direct management funding received. For context: Romania had 164, for EUR 16 billion. Hungary: 110. Bulgaria: 97. Congo had 7. Uganda had 6. Belgium had 4. Fewer than Uganda.
The two tables that showed Belgium at the very top of fraud rankings were deleted.
A Union built on the rule of law cannot apply one transparency standard in Bucharest and another in Brussels.
The institutions mandated to protect the EU budget must answer to the same rules regardless of which country sits at the top of the list.
This is a demand that EU live up to what it says it stands for.
The data is OLAF’s own. The deleted tables were OLAF’s own. Every number here is traceable and named. OLAF has been asked to respond. The answer, or the silence, will be published here.
