An investigation uncovers irregularities in Denmark's controversial purchase of Israeli weapons from Elbit.
An investigation conducted by an independent lawyer concluded that there were errors and unacceptable circumstances in the Elbit deal. The law firm Bruun & Hjejle completed its investigation into the Danish Armed Forces' purchase of equipment from the Israeli company Elbit in January 2023. This deal had sparked widespread criticism from Danish parliamentary parties directed at the Danish government due to the circumstances surrounding it. As a result, the former leader of the Liberal Party, Jakob Ellemann-Jensen, relinquished the Ministry of Defense portfolio to his party colleague, Troels Lund Poulsen, who was then Minister of Economic Affairs. This exchange of portfolios was announced at a press conference notably absent of Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen. Subsequently, Jakob Ellemann-Jensen announced his resignation from the party leadership and all his other positions, including the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the post of Deputy Prime Minister, effectively leaving Danish politics. Nevertheless, those demanding an independent investigation into the circumstances of the deal with the Israeli company succeeded in making it a reality, and the independent investigation was indeed conducted by a neutral law firm. It is worth noting that despite Following the signing of the deal agreement, the Israeli arms company informed Denmark of a one-year delay in delivery and an increase in the agreed amount by one billion kroner.
Returning to the investigation, it concluded that errors had occurred and that the relevant authorities had been criticized. In this regard, the Ministry of Justice published a statement several days ago on its official website, which read as follows:
The impartial legal inquiry into the procurement of fire support systems for the armed forces has now been completed. The inquiry, conducted by the law firm Bruun & Hjejle, concluded that errors had occurred and that unacceptable conditions existed at the authority level within the Ministry of Defence's Equipment and Procurement Agency (FMI) and in the Ministry of Defence's administration.
The Department of Defense and the FMI are facing minor criticism because the documents for the purchase of the ATMOS and PULS systems contain incorrect information regarding the time validity of the offer.
The FMI was also criticized for its market hedging, which, according to the investigation's assessment, was in fundamental aspects contrary to the FMI's own guidelines on market investigations. In this regard, the investigation confirmed that Elbit was given strong priority in both process and content. It cannot be ruled out that the market hedging for other potential suppliers might have unfolded differently had the FMI prioritized them accordingly.
The investigation also criticized FMI for failing to inform the Department of Defense about the settlement agreement between Elbit and FMI. This was because, according to the investigation's assessment, it was appropriate and necessary for FMI to disclose the settlement agreement and the circumstances surrounding it.
“The investigation conducted by the lawyer clearly confirms that several errors occurred in the Elbit case. It is only natural that I take this very seriously when the investigation criticizes both the Ministry of Defence and the FMI. Following the serious and justified criticism that followed the Elbit case, there have been significant changes and replacements in senior management at both the Ministry of Defence and the FMI. In addition, important work is underway with the organization at the FMI. Minister of Defence Troels Lund Poulsen says: “The findings of the investigation conducted by the impartial lawyer must be incorporated into this work.”.
According to the agency, and in accordance with the framework for investigating lawyers in the country, the investigation only included written materials. In addition to the listed cases where the investigation found grounds for criticism, the investigation chose in several instances to refrain from making assessments or drawing conclusions. This was done with the understanding that contributions from the individuals involved would be required in the form of interviews or similar means. In one area, the study recommends conducting such conversations with the individuals concerned. This relates to the question of whether there is a connection between the settlement agreement between Elbit and the FMI and the contracts between the FMI and Elbit. Here, the investigation assesses that there is a presumption of actual connection.
“From the outset, I wanted the Elbit case to be clarified. It’s a very thorough investigation by Bruun & Hjejle, based on a very large amount of material. So it’s also important that we follow the case to the end. Against this backdrop, I decided to follow the recommendation that the issue of the relationship between the settlement and the signing of the contract should be clarified further through conversations with a number of people. Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen says: “Once the interviews are conducted, an assessment will be made as to whether the case has any implications under labor law.”.
The statement has ended.
facts
The legal inquiry began after the Minister of Defence and several parties in the Danish Parliament agreed to investigate the process in relation to the fact that in January 2023 it was decided that the Danish Armed Forces would purchase new fire support systems from Elbit Corporation.
The law firm Bruun & Hjejle conducted an impartial legal investigation into the process at the Ministry of Defence's Materials and Procurement Agency (FMI), Defence Command (FKO), and the Department of Defence.
Source: Danish Ministry of Defence
