The European Ombudsman Emily O'Reilly | Frederik Florin/AFP via Getty Images EU’s top watchdog slams Council secrecy EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly says Council’s workings are secretive and lack transparency.

The Council of the EU’s “opaque” way of working contributes to the culture of blaming Brussels for the Continent’s ills, according to the EU’s top watchdog, who is demanding action to make the institution less secretive.

Presenting a highly critical “Special Report” on the lack of transparency and accountability at the institution, EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly said that the Council needs to change to allow citizens to see what member country diplomats are doing on their behalf.

“[The secrecy] lowers people’s consciousness of how decisions are made,” she said. “They assume it’s the usual business of Brussels bureaucrats when actually it’s members of their own governments who are accountable to their own governments.”

The report on “The transparency of the Council legislative process” is the result of a strategic inquiry lasting more than a year, which included questions to the Council, public consultation, and inspections of legislative files. O’Reilly issued recommendations to the Council earlier this year but it failed to respond within the legal three-month deadline on May 9, she said. As a result, she has passed the report — only the second she has issued — to the European Parliament to increase the pressure on the Council to act.

The Ombudsman’s role is to investigate complaints from citizens, business and others about maladministration in the EU institutions and agencies and O’Reilly has considerable powers to uncover documents and internal correspondence.

“All of us here constantly, EU institutions and member states leaders, are lamenting the lack of citizen engagement … and so-called democratic deficit,” O’Reilly told reporters Thursday. “So they [the Council] have to match that rhetoric with practical measures, which is allowing their citizens to see what their own member states are doing.”

“This hopefully will get us away of the blaming Brussels culture,” she added. “I don’t think any of us can imagine a minister in our own member states going on to a TV or radio station and being asked directly about a measure they were taking in domestic setting, and the minister replying ‘No I’m not telling you, I’m keeping it secret.'”

“Essentially, that’s what happens in the council,” she said.

The report is highly critical of the way diplomats in different Council formations operate — in particular the sweeping powers they use to keep discussions during policymaking secret, with no minutes of minutes recorded. “What we found seems to be happening is that the member states' positions are simply not being recorded,” O’Reilly said.

In its recommendations, the Ombusdman said that the Council “should systematically record the identity of member states' governments when they express positions in Council preparatory bodies,” and explain the criteria for how it designates documents as “LIMITE” — those with a restricted circulation.

“You can’t just do that, just have a blanket veto on the release of records or the restriction of records, that you have to judge everyone individually and see whether an exemption applies,” she said.

A spokesperson for the Council said that the ombudsman had raised "complex issues" that required political decisions. "Input at the political level by the Council is a process which is bound to take some time," the spokesperson said.

"The Council therefore asked that the deadline for submitting a detailed opinion on the Ombudsman's recommendations be extended until early July 2018. This request was denied on 7 May 2018, only one day before the expiry of the deadline. This meant that it was impossible for the Council to make known its position. "

"The Council will continue work on improving the transparency of its procedures, including those covered by the Ombudsman´s recommendations, and will keep the Ombudsman informed," the spokesperson added.

O’Reilly also said her office has had 10 cases of complaints involving the issue of Brexit, among which two are still pending. The cases involved mainly issues of transparency and access to documents, a spokesperson from the Ombudsman said.

UPDATE: This article was updated on 17 May 2018 to include a response from a Council spokesperson.