Decision of the European Ombudsman on complaint 1301/2000/BB against the European Parliament

Dear Mr P.,

On 13 October 2001 you made a complaint to the European Ombudsman concerning alleged lack or refusal of information in the context of Open Competition EUR/A/151/98.

On 16 November 2001, I forwarded the complaint to the President of the European Parliament. The Parliament sent its opinion on 5 February 2001 and I forwarded it to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. No observations appear to have been received from you.

I am writing now to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

The complainant claims that after having received on 8 October 1999 the acknowledgement of receipt of his application to Open Competition EUR/A/151/98, he has not received a letter of invitation to the written exams of the above-mentioned competition. Despite various telephone calls to the relevant service of the Parliament the complainant has obtained no information whatsoever.

THE INQUIRY

The Parliament's opinion

By letter of 8 October 1999, the service 'Concours' acknowledged the receipt of the complainant's application in which it was indicated that the candidates had to send a telefax or fax if they had not received a reply by 28 February 2000. The coordinates of the contact person were clearly mentioned in the above-mentioned letter.

According to the Parliament the complainant never wrote to the service 'Concours' as instructed in the letter dated 8 October 1999. The complainant had at his disposal an administrative address, a fax number and an e-mail address.

In his letter of 13 October 2000, the complainant claims that he has addressed numerous phone calls to the service 'Concours' without receiving any information. The Parliament noted that the secretariat of the service always gives the requested information to persons calling the secretariat, if the calls are made within office hours. When the secretariat is absent phone calls are diverted to a colleague at the central Secretariat.

The complainant was informed by a letter of 29 February 2000 of the fact that he was not admitted to the competition. The Parliament presumes that the complainant received this letter as it was sent to the same address as the previous letter to the complainant (which is still the complainant's current address) and it was never returned to the Parliament.

According to the notice of competition the complainant had one month to contest the decision of the Selection Board. As the complainant did not contest the decision, the Selection Board eliminated him from the written tests.

The Administration of the Parliament considered that it had fully informed the complainant about the progress of the competition, the procedures to follow and the deadlines to respect in order to ensure the best possible conditions of participation to the competition.

The complainant's observations

The complainant appears not to have sent observations.

THE DECISION

1 Alleged lack or refusal of information within Open Competition EUR/A/151/98

1.1 The complainant claims that after having received on 8 October 1999 the acknowledgement of receipt of his application to Open Competition EUR/A/151/98, he has not received a letter of invitation to the written exams of the above-mentioned competition. Despite various telephone calls to the relevant service of the Parliament the complainant has obtained no information whatsoever.

1.2 The Parliament stated in its opinion that by letter of 8 October 1999, the service 'Concours' acknowledged the receipt of the complainant's application in which it was indicated that the candidates had to send a telefax or fax if they had not received a reply by 28 February 2000. The coordinates of the contact person were clearly mentioned in the above-mentioned letter. According to the Parliament the complainant never wrote to the service 'Concours' as instructed in the letter dated 8 October 1999. The complainant had at his disposal an administrative address, a fax number and an e-mail address. Furthermore, the Parliament noted that the secretariat of the service always gives the requested information to persons calling the secretariat, if the calls are made within office hours.

1.3 According to the Parliament, the complainant was informed by a letter of 29 February 2000 of the fact that he was not admitted to the competition. The Parliament presumes that the complainant received this letter as it was sent to the same address as the previous letter to the complainant (which is still the complainant's current address) and it was never returned to the Parliament. According to the notice of competition the complainant had one month to contest the decision of the Selection Board. As the complainant did not contest the decision, the Selection Board eliminated him from the written tests.

1.4 The Ombudsman considers that these explanations provided by the Parliament appear reasonable. On the basis of the above, there appears to have been no maladministration on the part of the European Parliament.

2 Conclusion

On the basis of the Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Parliament. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

Yours sincerely,

 

Jacob SÖDERMAN