11.04.15

The EPO’s Investigative Unit Exposed: Part I

Posted in Europe, Patents at 8:01 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Some new observations about the notorious Investigative Unit, which has turned the EPO into somewhat of a rogue state which necessitates rescuing from the outside (as it has become too rogue to self-heal)

NEW MATERIAL EVIDENCE has emerged to support our allegations that EPO is now an autocracy, at least partly above the law and sometimes covertly so. Speaking to a source we were able to retrieve documents that help show what we long suspected and sometimes knew for a fact about the shady Investigative Unit. It is sometimes referred to as the I.U. or the Investigation Unit. What it boils down to, irrespective of the name, is just a bunch of goons who are loyal to Battistelli. Guess who gave them power?

“Transparency is desperately needed here, especially since many outsiders wonder about the huge surge in complaints from staff, suicides, and so on.”This post is part of a series that will investigate the Investigative Unit and explain how it came about. It is a cautionary tale for any other European institution or politicians who dare consider creating another country within a country (not like Monaco, Luxembourg, the Vatican or Lichtenstein).

This series of posts contains several documents of interest. We also present some general observations about the EPO’s Investigative Unit and its organisational role. In future parts we will talk about individual members of the Investigative Unit and where they came from, what for, and so on. Transparency is desperately needed here, especially since many outsiders wonder about the huge surge in complaints from staff, suicides, and so on.

“As you may have heard,” said our source, “the EPO recently decided to publish its staff rules and regulations.”

The published version of the EPO Service Regulations which can be downloaded from the official web site [PDF] contains the by-now notorious “Guidelines for Investigations at the EPO (Circular No. 342).” The file has over 400 pages in it, so it’s easy to overlook these things.

One has to dig deeper in order to realise that something is amiss. As our source put it, “the published version of the Service Regulations omits a number of interesting documents, including one relating to the Investigative Unit, namely the “EPO Charter for internal Audit and Oversight“. Here is the text which includes the missing/overlooked parts [PDF], an image thereof (because not many people bother opening PDF files), and some excepts from it to follow:

FinRegs – Internal Audit and Oversight


EUROPEAN PATENT OFFICE CHARTER FOR INTERNAL AUDIT AND OVERSIGHT1

PDIAO

The EPO Charter for internal Audit and Oversight “was issued on 17th January 2013 as a “Decision” of the EPO President,” told us a source. It “defines the purpose, scope, authority and responsibilities of the Principal Directorate of Internal Audit and Oversight (PDIAO) also known internally in the EPO as PD 0.6.

“According to the Charter the functions encompassed by PDIAO include “Investigations: carrying out investigations of alleged misconduct, including harassment, in accordance with Circular No. 342, Guidelines for investigations at the EPO”.

“So, in simple terms, this isn’t really an objective apparatus but a means for subjugation.”The definition of harassment is often so vague and the scope is so broad that harassment by the EPO President is excused or altogether ignored. These are just instruments of power, to be used only by those in positions of power, selectively. It’s similar to the application of mass surveillance, where everyone is a suspect and anyone can be framed upon demand (there is so much data which can be put together in a misleading fashion).

“What is of particular interest here,” explained our source, “is Part IV of the Charter which deals with “Authority and responsibilities”.

“From section (5) we learn that the Head of PDIAO reports administratively to the President and is directly subordinate to him alone and answerable to him for disciplinary purposes.”

So, in simple terms, this isn’t really an objective apparatus but a means for subjugation.

Why is this significant? Our source tried to explain this in relation to some background information. To quote this in bulk:

When questioned about the Investigative Unit, the standard response of EPO management is that such units are commonly found in international organisations (IOs) like the EPO. Statements along these lines can be found in the article entitled “Staat im Staate” (“A state within a state“) which was published in the weekend edition of the Süddeutsche Zeitung on 20/21 December 2014 .

But the self-serving official narrative of EPO management conveniently omits to mention that in other IOs the Investigative Unit typically reports directly to the governing body.

The EPO seems to be unique in this regard because its Investigative Unit is entirely subordinate to the executive head of the organisation (the President).

Even more surprising is the fact that all of the rules and regulations relating to the operation of the Investigative Unit, such as Circular No. 342 and the PDIAO Charter, were single-handedly signed into existence by the President without any formal approval by the EPO’s governing body (the Administrative Council).

Another detail worth noting here is that in other IOs the appointment and dismissal of the head of the Investigative Unit is typically a decision of the governing body, or at least subject to the approval of that body. That means that the head of the Investigative Unit enjoys a certain degree of independence vis-à-vis the executive head of the organisation and, once appointed, can only be removed from office for serious reasons and if the governing body agrees. Compare that with the arrangement at the EPO where the President has unfettered discretionary control over the appointment and dismissal of the head of the Investigative Unit.

To put all of this into some kind of comparative perspective, recall that in June of this year, as reported by Gene Quinn of the US-based blog “IP Watchdog”, the Chair of WIPO’s General Assembly which is the governing body representing the 188 member states of that organisation, requested that the U.N.’s internal watchdog, the Organization of Internal Oversight Service (OIOS), initiate an investigation of the Director General of WIPO, Francis Gurry.

Such a scenario is unlikely to occur at the EPO, because the EPO lacks any mechanism for an independent investigation of alleged misconduct on the part of its executive head.

Under Circular No. 342, the President of the EPO has complete control over all investigative activity at the EPO and he has used this Circular to create an arrangement which for all practical intents and purposes renders himself immune from investigation. Even if the Administrative Council had the political will to investigate the President, it lack the means to do so!

So what we have here, in effect, is a situation in which the rules and regulations governing the operation of the EPO’s Investigative Unit place more or less absolute power into the hands of the President. What is even more extraordinary is that these rules and regulations were single-handedly signed into existence by the President himself without any formal approval from the Administrative Council.

To appreciate the wider implications of all this it necessary to recall that according to the European Patent Convention, the governing body of the European Patent Organisation, the Administrative Council, is responsible for the adoption and amendment of internal legislation governing the European Patent Office.

Article 33 of the EPC defines the competences of the Administrative Council to adopt and amend the various internal rules and regulations, in particular the Service Regulations for permanent employees and the conditions of employment of other employees of the European Patent Office.

By means of Circular No. 342, the President of the EPO basically signed new staff regulations into existence without going through the normal legislative process which would have necessitated the approval of the Administrative Council.

Now we know how the Investigative Unit came into existence and where it derives its power from and at whose command (or chain of command). The next parts will look deeper into who enabled the Investigative Unit to operate so recklessly and who is actually operating within it and how.

Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Reddit
  • email

This post is also available in Gemini over at:

gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2015/11/04/epo-iu-secret-matters/

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. The Next Generation of Free Software (or Software Freedom) Activism, Tackling Newer Problems

    New challenges as labour rights and human rights are further eroded, thanks to 'high' 'tech' with its very 'innovative' 'features'



  2. Mass Litigation Over the Salary Adjustment Procedure (SAP), Basically an Attack on All EPO Staff, Even EPO Pensioners

    “Importance of a binding and unambiguous erga omnes declaration” stressed by staff representatives of the EPO in a new letter to Benoît Battistelli‘s successor of choice, António Campinos, who has done nothing so far except attacking (or robbing) EPO staff, even EPO pensioners



  3. EPO 'Dialogue' With Staff Representatives is as Dead as 'Dialogue' With the Union

    “Yet another failure of social [sic] dialogue [sic] for Mr Campinos,” according to staff representatives, who rightly bemoan the Office president not giving a damn about staff; things quickly deteriorate in Europe’s second-largest institution, which does even worse things than granting loads of illegal European software patents (harming software producers and users alike)



  4. The FSF Needs to Reject OSI (and Open Source) Along With Much-Needed Rejection of the GNOME Foundation (Not the Same as the GNOME Project)

    Response to a good little speech (unscripted apparently) by Geoffrey Knauth, who explained his position on Open Source about a year ago



  5. Links 11/5/2021: Bodhi Linux 6.0, Coreboot 4.14, and DragonFly BSD 6.0

    Links for the day



  6. IRC Proceedings: Monday, May 10, 2021

    IRC logs for Monday, May 10, 2021



  7. Keynote by FSF President Geoff Knauth and Executive Director John Sullivan

    To quote the source: “FSF president Geoff Knauth became the president of the FSF in 2020, but has served on the FSF board of directors for over twenty years. FSF executive director John Sullivan started work with the FSF in 2003, and has never stopped since, with past roles including the FSF’s first Campaigns Manager and later the Manager of Operations.”



  8. Richard Stallman on Companies That Are “Only Pretending to be American Companies”

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, speaks about US politics being captured and dominated by large and multinational corporations in pursuit of just money and power



  9. Last Night's Talk by Richard Stallman About Software Freedom

    An inspiring new talk reminds many of us why loads of people continue to support the founder of the Free Software Movement



  10. Links 10/5/2021: Huawei's GNU/Linux Laptops and Kotlin 1.5.0

    Links for the day



  11. Richard Stallman on Writing rm, ls, and cp (Also Working on Bison)

    Dr. Richard Stallman, the Free Software Foundation's founder, explains what programs he developed in the eighties



  12. Raise the Roof

    Out comes the taxpayers’ subsidy, assured; with military the sky is the limit (and bailout guaranteed)



  13. Richard Stallman Replatformed 10 Hours From Now

    Link to the talk (when it goes live)



  14. [Meme] Bill Says, Bill Saves

    Bill Gates seems more likely to be indicted than to win a presidential election/term



  15. IRC Proceedings: Sunday, May 09, 2021

    IRC logs for Sunday, May 09, 2021



  16. According to the Wall Street Journal, Bill Gates’s Relationship with Jeffrey Epstein Caused the Bill-Melinda Divorce (While the Media Deflected to Dr. Stallman, Using a Phony 'Scandal')

    It’s becoming rather obvious that there’s real substance to accusations that Mr. Gates was in some sense enabling Jeffrey Epstein; while Gates-funded media told us that he was saving us from climate change and a pandemic (PR stunts for empathy and sympathy) Melinda worked really hard to distance herself from him, the father of her kids



  17. [Meme] Bill, What's Your Opinion?

    While it's ludicrous to insinuate that Mr. Gates somehow "started" COVID-19 he certainly "rode the wave" for reputation laundering purposes, profit, and distraction from scandals that precede the epidemic in China (and caused his marriage to break down)



  18. Links 10/5/2021: SystemRescueCD 8.03, KeePass 2.48 Released

    Links for the day



  19. How We Process and Upload Videos Hosted in Techrights

    With ffmpeg as the Swiss army knife (and various other utilities/programs ‘in between’) it’s possible to automate much of the pipeline associated with video production and self-hosting



  20. Richard Stallman's Free Software Speech in 2020 (FSF Turning 35)

    We've re-encoded (as WebM) the likely sole/only speech Richard Stallman gave about his movement last year; today seems like a suitable time to republish it because tomorrow a British university/group will replatform him (to use their term)



  21. The Chaos Theory

    Making GNU/Linux less stable and less predictable isn't good for GNU/Linux users; but it certainly helps sell Red Hat support contracts and vexation inside the community weakens Red Hat's competitors



  22. Gemini and Techrights: Still Growing in Gemini Space and Always Supporting/Loving the Protocol

    As we continue to expand in Gemini space (where our very large site became a very large and likely the largest capsule) it's worth explaining some of the overlooked merits of the protocol; unlike the World Wide Web (WWW) it does not impose things on the user/visitor, who is more or less in charge



  23. Links 9/5/2021: KDE Frameworks 5.82.0 Release and Patents Related to COVID Subjected to Waivers

    Links for the day



  24. Act More 'Professional' to Appease Mobs

    We should all think alike, dress alike, and like everybody (especially the business overlords)



  25. IRC Proceedings: Saturday, May 08, 2021

    IRC logs for Saturday, May 08, 2021



  26. Some Background on the Free Speech Society at the University of Buckingham, Where Richard Stallman is Being 'Replatformed'

    A private British university, the University of Buckingham, will 'host' (virtually) the most-defamed person in the Free software world; the Free Speech Society is only two years old and rationality for its existence is explained by its co-founder James Oliver



  27. Web Sites or News Sites Perish When Their Arguments Are Weak and/or Invalid

    "Just be honest!" is a simple motto for any site; but some sites sell out in pursuit of money or grandiosity, unlike us (we turned 14.5 years old on Friday)



  28. GNU/Linux Turns 38 (in 4 Months From Now)

    Contrary to what the Linux Foundation wants you to think, the operating system turns 38 later this year



  29. Richard Stallman: Steve Jobs Did Some Very Bad Things

    Dr. Richard Stallman told me about Steve Jobs that he had helped digitally imprison computer users



  30. GNU/Linux Founder Richard Stallman to Give a Talk at the University of Buckingham Tomorrow (Live Stream)

    Tomorrow it will be possible to watch this new talk live using Free software


RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

Recent Posts