A warm welcome to the very first 2026 edition of Bureau Brussels – your weekly deep dive into the power plays, backroom deals, and expert investigations shaping life for over 450 million EU citizens. Tips or feedback? Reach us at [email protected].
This week:
- Nepotism at NATO: tens of thousands of euros paid to the brother of one of the most senior officials at its procurement agency
- EU tech rules: pressure mounts to act against Big Tech
- MEP expenses: will Parliament finally close long-criticised loopholes?
STORY OF THE WEEKBrothers in arms: nepotism at NATO
NATO’s procurement agency broke its own rules when it paid the brother of one of its most high-ranking officials more than 80,000 euros, FTM and French publication La Lettre reveal today.
A whistleblower, who was fired by the NSPA in 2020, alerted us about the case after we published investigations into the agency. The controversy dates back to a payment made in 2019 – but the only public document about the case didn’t name who were involved in the case.
Now, we can reveal that at the centre of this case was a current director of NSPA, Orhan Muratli, who has been at the Luxembourg-based agency for several decades. In 2018, Muratli was promoted to director, putting him in charge of the department where the alleged misconduct occurred.
A report by the military alliance’s external auditor in 2022, which only referred to the brothers anonymously, found that the payout breached internal rules. Internal communications, shared with La Lettre and FTM by a former French NSPA official, confirm that the case is about the Muratli brothers.
For more than 10 years, his brother Vedat worked for the agency as an external consultant, mainly operating in Afghanistan. According to the auditor, Vedat worked an average of 329 days a year at NSPA – a breach of the organisation’s rules for short-term employees.
The situation escalated in early 2019, when NSPA decided not to renew Vedat’s contract, citing an alleged conflict of interest: by that time, Vedat had already been operating under the line of control of his brother Orhan for 15 months, the audit found.
Despite this, NSPA still paid €80,605 to Vedat Muratli in settlement fees.
The NSPA later justified the payout, arguing it feared potential litigation from Vedat. The auditor rejected this explanation, concluding that the payment was “non-eligible”, as Vedat’s temporary contract was expiring and didn’t include a settlement fee.
The auditor also warned that “there is a risk that any long-term consultant currently employed by NSPA may claim similar settlements”.
To worsen matters, NSPA’s financial controller did not approve the payment to Vedat Muratli before it was made – another clear violation of the agency’s rules.
Neither the Muratli brothers nor the NSPA replied to our requests for comment.
(Below: a photograph taken from Facebook showing Vedat Muratli, right, during his time in Afghanistan.)
Over the past year, Donald Trump has shouted at, threatened or cajoled the EU while European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen has remained, for the most part, mute. One issue in particular angers the U.S. president: the EU’s push to rein in U.S. tech giants.
The EU has played it cool. But in early December, Commission Vice-President Henna Virkkunen announced a €120 million fine against Elon Musk’s X. The EU executive also ordered the platform to curb problematic practices like selling blue-check authentications.
But what is this year going to bring?
Members of the European Parliament insist this should be just the beginning. They say the Commission must step up enforcement of its digital rulebook against Meta, Google, and Amazon, and decide whether to pursue the ongoing competition probe into Google’s advertising monopoly.
In 2026, the EU must show whether it can move beyond tough talk. According to MEPs and digital rights NGOs, this should result in billions of euros in fines, and decisively move towards curbing the power of Big Tech.
Alexander Fanta
At the start of 2026, key EU lawmakers will meet to discuss a crucial reform of the rules governing their own institution. After years of scandals about how MEPs have been misusing money for their assistants and expenses, it’s a unique opportunity to practice their self-professed values of transparency, integrity, and accountability.
There’s little dispute that MEPs should be well paid. But the complexity of current systems and the numerous loopholes for claiming additional money have kept doors wide open to abuses. Is it reasonable they don’t need to provide any justification to pocket a monthly €5,000 expenditure allowance? Or that they can claim an additional €350 “daily subsistence allowance”?
With that meeting set, can we expect changes for the better?
We’re not sure: the political mood seems to be shifting – the wrong way. Instead of closing loopholes, some MEPs are blaming transparency rules and overzealous prosecutors for the institution’s bad reputation. That could be bad news for those badly needed changes to the internal rules.
Follow the Money will be keeping a close eye.
Simon Van Dorpe
Our reporters look back on the investigations, turning points, and pressures that shaped their work in 2025 – from unexpected moments behind major revelations to the intensity of getting complex stories over the line.
Our most-read stories of 2025
Curious which stories defined Follow the Money’s reporting in 2025? Explore our most-read investigations of the year and the issues that dominated Europe’s power debates.
Podcast | Our most-listened-to podcasts of 2025
We’ve compiled Follow the Money’s most-listened-to podcast episodes from last year, reflecting the investigations and conversations that resonated most with our audience, from Pfizergate and spyware to festival takeovers and fast fashion. Missed one or want to revisit the highlights? Explore our curated Spotify and YouTube playlists featuring the podcasts you listened to most in 2025.