Following the scandal caused by the suspension of a member of the Boards of Appeal, FOSS Patents considers that the EPO suffers from structural issues and that: "The Administrative Council plays a key role in the "reign of terror" that tries to discourage EPO staff, including judges, from fighting for basic human rights and one of the most fundamental values of the civilized world: judicial independence. [..] "Instead of exercising oversight, that body is largely responsible for the banana republic that the EPO has become."

The Intellectual Property Judges' Association (IPJA) expresses in a letter to Mr Jesper Kongstad (Chairman of the Administrative Council) "the extreme concern of European Patent Judges" to the order of Mr Battistelli, acting on his own initiative, to physically remove a member of the Boards of Appeal from his office and to take possession of his computer.IPJA is the representative association of European National Patent Judges and their letter has near unanimous support and no objection by anyone. IPKat publishes a copy of the letter.

According to IPJA, the events "threaten the judicial independence of the Boards of Appeal [...] Not tolerating that should be the common interest of all Member States of the EPOrg". A copy of the letter will be sent to EPLAW, IPKat and Managing IP. Managing IP is the magazine which published the controversial interview of Mr Battistelli and Mr Kongstad on 19 December 2014.

Further concerns are raised by IPKat following astudy of the "Business Distribution Scheme for the Technical Boards of Appeal".This document is issued at the beginning of every year by the Enlarged Presidium of the Boards of Appeal and it sets out ("designates”) how the various Technical Boards of Appeal are to be made up, namely with the Chairman, the technical members and the legally qualified members. The scheme for 2015 is only stated to be for the period ending on 31 March 2015. Usually plans have been for the whole calendar year. In addition to that, some Boards have no Chairman, some are understaffed and re-appointments are still pending.

IPKat concludes that "A worrying but plausible conclusion is that it is to make the Members concerned more biddable as their term comes up. Any such pressure, whether subtle or overt, would of course completely conflict with accepted principles of judicial independence."

IPKat reports on the latest developments at the EPO. The European Parliament rejected a petition to investigate the EPO and declared itself incompetent.

The Member of Parliament for Cambridge, Dr Julian Huppert had tabled a question to ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills "What steps he is taking to proect the independence of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the EPO". There has been a response: "It is the UK Government position that the Boards of Appeal should be independent of the executive of the EPO, and be seen to be so. This view is shared by other EPO member states and we expect proposals to make this clearer to be considered by the Administrative Council, the Office’s supervisory body, in March 2015."

Finally, IPKat reports on the latest threats of disciplinary action from Mr Battistelli to SUEPO officials.

EPLAW is the association of European lawyers specialized in patent matters. In a letter sent to the delegations of the Administrative Council (AC), this association takes note of the decision of the President to temporarily take the computer of a member of the Boards of Appeal and to order a house ban on him.

EPLAW is of the opinion that judicial independence (Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)) is guaranteed only when the power to suspend or remove a judge is with his peers and not with an executive body.Article 11 EPC currently gives the power to the AC to exercise disciplinary authority over members of the BoA.

EPLAW urges the Council to propose an amendment to Article 11 EPC and in any event to critically review the Guidelines for Investigation.

IPKat publishes a summary of the recents events at the EPO and outlines the issues now facing the EPO: "The current unrest is not only at the level of the Examiners and regular employees, but even within the exalted ranks of the Boards of Appeal and Enlarged Board."

The interview of Mr Battistelli and Mr Kongstad (Chairman of the Administrative Council) in Managing IP and, in particular, their statements concerning "transparency and openness" attracted angry rebuttals in the IPKat comments: "the staff representatives have been excluded from the two previous Administrative Council meetings; the introduction of a new system of election of staff representatives by the really-not-very-democratic single non-transferrable vote; the reference to the "codex of staff regulations" which is 1,200 pages long and actually not available publicly".

The comments of Mr Battistelli on his blog caused yet more anger, in particular "I would also urge all commentators, especially those having a legal background, to be mindful in their public expression on a case which is still under investigation, in order to protect the rights of the defence and to guarantee the impartiality of the investigation under the supervision of the Administrative Council which is the decision making body." Many have seen this as a threat, and an unwelcome one.

The Süddeutsche Zeitung reports on the strikes and demonstrations of EPO staff defending their fundamental rights.The article was published in the section Wirtschaft report of the weekend edition (20/21 December) of the newspaper. Translation in English and French are available by scrolling through the document.

Jean-Yves Leconte is a member of the French Senate and represents French expatriates. He made an intervention on 8 December 2014 in the French parliament and interpellated Emmanuel Macron, Minister of Economy. The Senator explained that the social climate in the Office was dramatic and asked the government to react. The Minister acknowledged that he was aware of the situation and that the French Ambassador in the Netherlands recently met staff representatives.The Minister added that he shared these concerns and would remain alert with respect to this topic.

Les Echos reports on the social tensions in the Office. The reactions of the IP judges against the suspension of a DG3 member show that the Office might lose the trust of its users, namely the industry and the attorneys.

The Council Secretariat made an announcement on the EPO website concerning alleged misconduct by a Council appointee (namely, the suspended DG3 member). FOSS Patents makes an in-depth analysis of this announcement.

OVB online (printable version) reports on the demonstration in front of the ISAR building on Wednesday 10 December and the current atmosphere in the Office.

Similiar articles are published by the Münchner Merkur, Frankfurter Rundschau and Stuttgarter Zeit.