Dismissive replies to an ordinary citizen

Available languages: bg.es.cs.da.de.et.el.en.fr.ga.it.lv.lt.hu.mt.nl.pl.pt.ro.sk.sl.fi.sv
  • Case: 0808/2011/MHZ
    Opened on 19 May 2011 - Decision on 27 Mar 2012, 27 Mar 2012
  • Institution(s) concerned: European Council
  • Field(s) of law: General, financial and institutional matters
  • Types of maladministration alleged – (i) breach of, or (ii) breach of duties relating to: Requests for information [Article 22 ECGAB]
  • Subject matter(s): Dealing with requests for information and access to documents (Transparency)
Trust
Author: Mongkol Chakritthakool
Copyright: Copyright: © mongkol chakritthakool

Summary of the decision on complaint 808/2011/MHZ against the European Council

The complainant, a Polish citizen, became aware that, while on holiday, the President of the European Council had used service cars to travel from Brussels to a French airport and back, together with his family. He asked the European Council to reply to a number of questions and for a copy of the relevant rules on the use of service cars for personal purposes. Since the European Council's replies were dismissive and the complainant's queries were simply ignored, he turned to the European Ombudsman.

The opinion on the complaint was submitted by the General Secretariat of the Council of the EU, which assists the European Council. The General Secretariat attached a copy of the European Council's reply to parliamentary questions which were very similar to the complainant's query. In this reply, the relevant rules were put forward.

The Ombudsman found that the European Council's replies to the complainant were inappropriate. He wondered why the European Council did not give the complainant the same or a similar reply as that which it had given to the relevant MEP. He therefore made a proposal for a friendly solution in which he suggested that the European Council apologise to the complainant. The European Council did so. The Ombudsman praised the Council for having apologised to an 'ordinary' citizen who hardly has the opportunity to be in touch with the EU institutions and yet has turned to the European Council to voice his concern. The Ombudsman concluded that this sincere apology constitutes the best example of the EU administration showing respect for citizens. He pointed out that, without this respect, the gap between the EU and its citizens cannot be narrowed. He closed the case as settled by the European Council.