The Caritas special committee has held a series of meetings since it was set up in October “and we still haven't had any answers to our questions,” laments MP  (Piratenpartei). On Monday 20 January, it was the turn of the monitoring committee, made up of officials from several ministries (state, family, finance, education and foreign affairs) to appear before the MPs, with the same result.

“The monitoring committee simply... monitors. And the political impetus was clearly to let PWC do its thing… and not to blame the two banks that had, quite unwisely, allowed Caritas to be gutted,” comments MP (LSAP) on Linkedin. Already at the previous meeting of the special committee on 13 January, , as the Caritas Foundation and PWC had been invited to answer the MPs' questions, but sent in requests for conditions to intervene.

Twenty votes needed

“We’re really being treated with contempt, PWC thinks it’s the country's leading authority,” adds Clement. “When the Caritas affair broke, several opposition parties were quick to propose setting up a committee of enquiry, not to take the place of the courts and point the finger, but to ensure that such an affair does not happen again. The majority proposed the creation of a special committee and we thought it would be enough to give us answers, so we went along with it. But the result is that we don’t know any more than we did in July.”

This is why the LSAP, déi Gréng, Déi Lénk and the Piraten Partei are discussing, informally for the moment, the creation of a committee of enquiry. “To do this, we need the votes of 20 MPs, and that's the case with our four parties,” explains Fayot.

MP  (déi Gréng) is cautious for the time being. “Let’s wait and see what happens at the committee’s next meetings, when we should be receiving Caritas. The work of the special committee ends in April, so we have until then to take a decision. Admittedly, we’re not moving as quickly as we’d hoped, but how can we be sure that a committee of enquiry will give us less vague answers? It won’t be a magic wand.”

“Nebulous” follow-up for Marc Baum

In the coming weeks, the special Caritas committee is due to receive members of HUT (Hëllef um Terrain) on 5 February, and on 24 February it will be the turn of the staff delegation to be heard. “One of the big absentees from the dossier is the bishopric too,” says Fayot. “It could be heard as part of a committee of enquiry. We don’t know why the government didn’t intervene to challenge the two banks involved. We have seen a more incisive government, for example during the banking crisis of 2008, when it was necessary to save the banks. A committee of enquiry allows us to be more incisive than a special committee, but does not interfere with the ongoing judicial investigation.”

Déi Lénk agrees. “It seems unimaginable, for example, that foreign affairs minister [ (DP)] would say that he learned of the creation of HUT from the press, or that the monitoring committee had no contact with the archdiocese. Or they may not be telling the truth, but that would be just as serious. When people come before the special committee, it seems as if they don’t want to be transparent, or that we MPs need to have very precise questions to get answers. It’s all very nebulous,” comments MP .

A committee of enquiry into the Srel affair

The Déi Lénk MP also explained that he was “waiting for the special committee to finish its work, to listen to all those involved, and then to draw up an assessment and see whether it would be appropriate to set up a committee of enquiry. Perhaps one of the conclusions of the special committee will be to set up a committee of enquiry, given the lack of sufficient answers.”

One of the best-known committees of enquiry is the one set up in connection with the Srel affair in 2013, which led to the fall of the Juncker government. Following the revision of the constitution, the law on parliamentary enquiries was amended in 2023: a committee of enquiry may now be set up at the request of one-third of the MPs, rather than by a majority as was previously the case. That means 20 MPs would be needed. Committee meetings are open to the public.

“Those questioned should also take an oath,” adds Baum.

This article was originally published in .