Decision in joint cases 897/2019/JAP and 1360/2019/JAP on how the European Institute for Gender Equality addressed the complainant’s concerns about unfair treatment of temporary interim employees and its alleged misleading public statements

Monday | 05 August 2019

Background to the complaint 1. A number of former interim staff, employed by a temporary work agency but working at the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), filed a complaint with the Lithuanian State Labour Inspectorate (Inspectorate) for infringement of the national labour law and the principle of equal treatment. The Inspectorate sided with the complainants and awarded them compensati...

Decision of the European Ombudsman in the above complaint on the failure of the European Commission to accommodate the needs of associations of staff members with a disability to participate remotely in the plenary session of the Management Committee for Sickness Insurance

Monday | 05 August 2019

Dear Mr X, On 5 July 2019, you submitted, on behalf of the Association of Staff with a Disability in the European Commission and the EC Disability Support Group, a complaint to the European Ombudsman. It concerned the denial by the European Commission[1] of your request to participate through a video conference in the plenary session of the Management Committee for Sickness Insurance (hereinafter ...

The Commission`s approval of EU funding of a motorway in Bulgaria and the respect of the EU environmental law

Monday | 29 July 2019

The Commission`s approval of EU funding of a motorway in Bulgaria and the respect of the EU environmental law.

The Council of the EU’s failure to deal with a request for public access to documents concerning Coca Cola’s sponsorship of the Romanian Presidency of the Council

Friday | 26 July 2019

The Council of the EU’s failure to deal with a request for public access to documents concerning Coca Cola’s sponsorship of the Romanian Presidency of the Council.

The Commission’s failure to reply to the complainant’s inquiries about the steps taken on his infringement complaint - (CHAP(2018)01743).

Wednesday | 24 July 2019

The Commission’s failure to reply to the complainant’s inquiries about the steps taken on his infringement complaint - (CHAP(2018)01743).

Decision in case OI/98/2018/PL on the Delegation of the European Union to Lebanon’s decision to recover funds granted for a project due to a conflict of interest

Tuesday | 23 July 2019

Background to the complaint 1. The complainant, a Lebanese association[1], received a grant from the Delegation of the European Union to Lebanon (the Delegation) for a project concerning cultural activities[2]. 2. After the implementation of the project, the Delegation carried out an ex post check of the association’s expenses[3]. As it turned out, through a procurement procedure, the association ...

How the European Commission dealt with requests for access to documents concerning a redress procedure for a rejected proposal under a Horizon 2020 call

Monday | 22 July 2019

How the European Commission dealt with requests for access to documents concerning a redress procedure for a rejected proposal under a Horizon 2020 call

Decision in case 766/2018/PL on how the European Chemicals Agency conducted a consultation on a proposal to restrict lead in gunshot

Tuesday | 16 July 2019

The case concerns how the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) conducted a consultation of stakeholders on a proposal to restrict lead in gunshot used in wetlands. The complainant took issue with the wording of the questions and the fact that the consultation was available in English only.

The Ombudsman considers that the questions, and the opportunity to send general comments, allowed participants to express their views freely. Regarding languages, however, the Ombudsman found ECHA’s justification for using English only to be inadequate.

The Ombudsman therefore welcomes ECHA’s commitment for the future to consider translating into other languages at least parts of its consultations. Where ECHA restricts the use of languages, it should put in place relevant safeguards such as making available a summary in all EU official languages, making relevant supporting material available in as many languages as possible and, above all, making clear that responses can be submitted in any EU official language. This latter element is a fundamental right.

The Ombudsman closed the case with a suggestion to ECHA to avoid similar problems arising in the future.

Decision in case 1082/2018/PL on how the European Chemicals Agency conducted a consultation on a proposal to restrict lead in gunshot

Tuesday | 16 July 2019

The case concerns how the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) conducted a consultation of stakeholders on a proposal to restrict lead in gunshot used in wetlands. The complainant took issue with the wording of the questions and the fact that the consultation was available in English only.

The Ombudsman considers that the questions, and the opportunity to send general comments, allowed participants to express their views freely. Regarding languages, however, the Ombudsman found ECHA’s justification for using English only to be inadequate.

The Ombudsman therefore welcomes ECHA’s commitment for the future to consider translating into other languages at least parts of its consultations. Where ECHA restricts the use of languages, it should put in place relevant safeguards such as making available a summary in all EU official languages, making relevant supporting material available in as many languages as possible and, above all, making clear that responses can be submitted in any EU official language. This latter element is a fundamental right.

The Ombudsman closed the case with a suggestion to ECHA to avoid similar problems arising in the future.

Decision in case 649/2019/TE on the Council’s failure to make available a German translation of a press release

Tuesday | 16 July 2019

The complaint concerned the fact that a press release containing remarks made by European Council President Donald Tusk on 6 February 2019 was made available in English, French and Irish only. The remarks were made following a meeting with the Irish Prime Minister.

The complainant had asked the Council to make available a German version of the press release. The Council replied that the press release would eventually be translated into all EU official languages.

The Ombudsman understands that it is the Council’s current practice to make remarks by the European Council President available in all EU official languages only in certain circumstances, for example when speaking after meetings of the European Council. Remarks made by the President following meetings with individual heads of state or government are generally made available either in English only, or in English and French, or in English, French and one additional official language. Thus, contrary to what the complainant was initially told by the Council, the press release in question was not translated into all official languages.

The Ombudsman acknowledges the need to strike an appropriate balance between linguistic diversity and administrative and budgetary constraints when translating documents. She also acknowledges that the EU institutions have some discretion in striking this balance. She considers that it was not manifestly wrong of the Council to make available the press release in question in English, French and Irish. At the same time, she considers that the Council should be transparent and clear about its translation policy and inform citizens accordingly. In this case, it provided misleading information to the complainant. This was regrettable.