Considering OLAF's far-reaching investigation powers, the article deals with the question what role judicial review can or should play in effectively protecting the fundamental rights of persons under investigation by OLAF. The article gives an overview of the different kinds of judicial review which are relevant in this respect, including interim relief. It also includes considerations on the possible contribution of the fundamental right to an effective remedy (Art. 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU) to the debate on judicial review of OLAF investigative acts.
The article focuses in particular on the case law on the inadmissibility of actions for annulment against OLAF investigative acts. This case law is based on the view that such acts do not to bring about a distinct change in the legal position of the applicant. In the article, it is proposed that an action for annulment could be considered admissible against an OLAF investigative act if such an act is shown to have deprived the applicant of the effective exercise, or of the benefit, of a fundamental right, thus opening a review limited to examining the compatibility of that specific act with fundamental rights.Common Market Law Review