You have a complaint against an EU institution or body?
Search inquiries
Showing 1 - 20 of 179 results
The European Data Protection Supervisor's (EDPS) refusal to grant public access to documents related to a report concerning the Schrems II ruling on international data transfers
Tuesday | 16 February 2021
Letter from the European Ombudsman to the European Data Protection Supervisor on its refusal to grant public access to documents related to a report concerning the Schrems II judgment
Friday | 12 February 2021
The European Data Protection Supervisor's refusal to grant public access to documents related to a report concerning the Schrems II judgment
Friday | 12 February 2021
Entscheidung der Europäischen Bürgerbeauftragten in dem oben gennanten Fall darüber wie die Europäische Kommission eine Vertragsverletzungsbeschwerde gegen Deutschland gehandhabt hat
Friday | 29 January 2021
Decision in case 1623/2020/PL on how the European Commission dealt with an infringement complaint against Spain for allowing a bank to foreclose a property
Monday | 23 November 2020
How the European Banking Authority (EBA) handled the move of its former executive director to become CEO of a financial industry lobby group
Friday | 20 November 2020
Decision in case 2168/2019/KR on the European Banking Authority’s decision to approve the request from its Executive Director to become CEO of a financial lobby group
Wednesday | 18 November 2020
The case concerned the decision of the European Banking Authority (EBA) to allow its Executive Director to take up a position as CEO of a lobby group.
The Ombudsman found two instances of maladministration and made three recommendations to avoid similar issues arising in future.
First, the EBA should, where necessary, invoke the option of forbidding its senior staff from taking up certain positions after their term-of-office. Any such prohibition should be time-limited, for example, for two years.
Second, the EBA should set out criteria for when it will forbid such moves in future so as to give clarity to senior staff. Applicants for senior EBA posts should be informed of the criteria when they apply.
Third, the EBA should put in place internal procedures so that once it is known that a member of its staff is moving to another job, their access to confidential information is cut off with immediate effect.
The Ombudsman closed the inquiry after the EBA accepted her recommendations and adopted measures to implement them.
The Ombudsman is confident that the policies the EBA has introduced will help it avoid damaging revolving door moves in the future. Other EU institutions and agencies should draw on these new EBA safeguards when revising their own rules.
The European Commission’s refusal to provide public access to documents pertaining to the closure of the Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency (CHAFEA)
Tuesday | 13 October 2020
The European Commission's failure to reply to concerns about potential conflicts of interest within the High Level Forum on Capital Markets Union
Tuesday | 06 October 2020
The European Commission's failure to reply to concerns about potential conflicts of interest within the High Level Forum on Capital Markets Union
Friday | 02 October 2020
The European Commission’s failure to take into consideration the complainant’s comments before closing infringement complaint against Spain, for allowing a bank to foreclose a property
Tuesday | 30 June 2020
Letter to the complainant from the European Ombudsman on how the European Banking Authority handled the move of its former Executive Director to become CEO of a financial industry lobby group
Thursday | 07 May 2020
Recommendation of the European Ombudsman in case 2168/2019/KR on how the European Banking Authority handled the move of its former Executive Director to become CEO of a financial industry lobby
Thursday | 07 May 2020
The Ombudsman received a complaint about the decision of the European Banking Authority (EBA) to allow its Executive Director to take up a position as CEO of an association representing banks, the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME).
The Ombudsman conducted an inquiry, inspected the relevant EBA documents and found maladministration, first, in that the EBA should have forbidden the job move. While the EBA adopted extensive restrictions, these are not sufficient when measured against the risks involved. The Ombudsman considers that if this move does not justify the application of the option, set out in the Staff Regulations, to forbid a staff member accepting a job offer, no move would.
Second, there was maladministration in that the EBA did not, once notified of the planned move, immediately withdraw its Executive Director’s access to confidential information.
The Ombudsman issues three recommendations to the EBA, which should (i) where necessary in future, invoke the option of forbidding its senior staff from taking up certain positions after their term-of-office. Any such prohibition should be time-limited, for example, for two years; (ii) set out criteria for when it will forbid such moves in future so as to give clarity to senior staff. Applicants for senior EBA posts should be informed of the criteria when they apply; and (iii) put in place internal procedures so that once it is known that a member of its staff is moving to another job, their access to confidential information is cut off with immediate effect.
The EBA should reply to these recommendations within three months.
The Commission and failure to reply to a fax alleging an infringement of EU law by Germany in the field of consumer protection
Tuesday | 05 May 2020
Decision of the European Ombudsman in the case 508/2020/TM on the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority’s (EIOPA) alleged wrong assessment of a complaint about Romanian authorities
Monday | 06 April 2020
Ombudsman concludes inquiry on how the Commission prevents conflicts of interest with scientific experts who give it advice
Tuesday | 31 March 2020
Decision in case 560/2019/KR on alleged conflicts of interest of experts who participate in the European Commission’s Scientific Advice Mechanism
Monday | 30 March 2020
The case concerned whether the European Commission has in place processes to ensure that scientific experts who advise it have no conflicts of interest.
The complainant, a civil society organisation, had raised concerns about the independence of scientific experts that contributed to an advisory report on plant protection products (commonly known as pesticides).
The Ombudsman found that the Commission has systems in place to assess the independence of experts. However, with a view to improving these systems, she asked the Commission to ensure that all relevant financial interests are included in experts’ declarations of interests, and that these declarations are assessed and published. She closed the case with these two suggestions for improvement.