Mr. President of these Meetings,
Mr. Valedor,
Honourable Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen

It is a great pleasure for me to take part in these Peace Education Meetings organized by the Rosalía de Castro Institute, in a place as welcoming as Santiago. After more than 50 years of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the issue is again topical in the European Union, now in the context of the drafting of a Fundamental Charter of Human Rights.
In order to clarify my point of view on this process, I would first like to make a brief presentation on the powers of the institution of the European Ombudsman. After which I will take up some of the proposals made, and conclude with possible solutions for the future.

1 THE INSTITUTION OF THE EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN

The figure of the Ombudsman in the European Union was developed in direct relation to the evolution of the concept of European citizenship. Following an initiative of the Spanish government, the Maastricht Treaty incorporated a new Part dedicated to citizenship of the Union. The new articles established a number of rights for every national of the Member States, regardless, and this is fundamental, of his status as an economic operator. Such rights include, inter alia:
- the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Union;
- the right to vote and to be a candidate in the usual place of residence for both European and municipal elections;
- the right to petition the European Parliament;
- and, most directly, the right to appeal to the European Ombudsman in the event that the Community administration has not acted correctly.
According to Article 259 of the Treaty, every citizen or resident of the Union has the right to complain to the Ombudsman about maladministration in the conduct of the institutions or bodies of the Community, to the exclusion of the Community courts in their judicial function.
In the event of Community maladministration, the Ombudsman must, as far as possible, seek an amicable solution with the institution responsible in order to satisfy the complainant. If this cannot be achieved, the Ombudsman may draw the attention of the institution responsible by means of recommendations and report the situation to the European Parliament.
Since my task is to avoid "bad administration" at Community level, it was necessary to clarify the definition of this term. As I pointed out in my 1997 annual report, which was supported by the European Parliament, maladministration occurs when a public body fails to comply with a rule or a legal principle applicable to it. Of course, among those rules and principles which every Community body or institution must respect are fundamental human rights, as set out in Article 6 of the Treaty of Amsterdam.
In order to establish a clear framework within which to apply the notion of maladministration, I have advocated that Community institutions and bodies apply codes of good administrative conduct. Instruments of this nature could define more clearly the obligations of the Community administration vis-à-vis citizens. These could include, by way of example, criteria on the right to be heard, or on the grounds for justifying certain acts. In addition to informing citizens, these codes would provide guidance to officials themselves on their professional conduct.

2 SOME CLAIMS CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS

While many of the complaints addressed to the European Ombudsman relate to the defence of important citizens' rights, few of them have come to address the issue directly.
Among the investigations carried out, I could point out my initiative to ensure greater transparency in public access to the institutions' documents; that relating to age limits in competitions and their possible discriminatory effect; or those on the administration's respect for the freedom of expression of its officials.
One of the issues I should mention to you is the great work we have done towards greater transparency within the Community institutions, especially in the area of access to documents. In my opinion, effective control by the administration requires recognition of the right of every citizen to access information held by the administration, as recognized in Article 10 of the European Convention on the Rights of Man. On this subject, the European Ombudsman has received a large number of complaints, and a number of ex officio initiatives have also been promoted.

3 FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN THE COMMUNITY SYSTEM

It is clear that in the exercise of my work, and in order to ensure respect for fundamental rights and freedoms at Community level, it is first necessary to define what those rights and freedoms are in the light of Community law.
After a long road in which the Court of Justice had a predominant role, Article 6 of the Treaty of Amsterdam repeated an already existing formula by which the Union committed itself to:

"Respect fundamental rights as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights [...] and as they result from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States as general principles of Community law".

The Union's will to defend citizens' rights is thus clear, and the protective role of the Court of Justice of the Communities in this area is also reaffirmed.
These fundamental rights are recognised as the basis of the Union, and the status of Member State may be suspended in the event of a violation of these rights. The Community institutions must monitor the implementation of these commitments by all Member States. It is foreseeable that this role will have to be exercised even more zealously in the case of the Central and Eastern European States whose accession to the Union is expected in the coming years.
Another very important contribution of the new Treaty on issues affecting citizens' rights concerns cooperation policies in the fields of justice and home affairs. Part of these issues, such as asylum, immigration and visas, become Community competences. A Community development framework should be set up under the supervision of the European Ombudsman and the control of the Court of Justice. As regards aspects which have not moved to the Community pillar, in particular police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters, the European institutions and the Member States must cooperate in order to establish "an area of freedom, security and justice". Initiatives in this area, including the actions of the European police force, EUROPOL, will fall under the competence of the European Ombudsman, so that this institution will be able to monitor their compliance with the principles of good administration.
Given the sensitivity of matters such as the right to asylum or the granting of visas from the point of view of individual rights, it will be necessary for the Community bodies to ensure that these rights are respected in the resolution of individual cases by the national authorities. Possibly a large number of these cases will turn into complaints addressed to the national ombudsmen, and also to the European Ombudsman.
Effective management of such problems requires the European Ombudsman not to act alone, but to work more directly with colleagues at national and regional level. While much progress has been made on that path and there is already a network of cooperation between us, that collaboration needs to be deepened. Only in this way will it be possible to ensure that challenges such as those of a common foreign policy, or that of freedom of movement within the Union, are carried out without detriment to the rights of our citizens.
On the other hand, I hope that in developing these new areas relating to human rights, the Community institutions will bear in mind the experience of the Council of Europe. Given the lengthy work of this body, to which the Member States have contributed for years, it would be appropriate to improve cooperation with this body.

4 INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE THE CURRENT SITUATION

Despite the constitutional reforms undertaken in recent years, the protection of human rights in the Union presents two major problems, in my view.
First, the Treaties speak of rights, without identifying them or establishing their content. Its incorporation into the framework of the Union is carried out by means of a diffuse figure such as the general principles. A citizen who dares to ask such a question must not only know Community law, but also become an expert in comparative law.
The second problem is that with this model it is not clear how these rights could be protected within the Union framework. Member States have ratified a number of relevant conventions, the most important of which is the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. Their authorities are therefore obliged to respect them, and any citizen can invoke their defence. On the other hand, if the action comes from a Community institution, within the framework of its competences, citizens do not have such a clear point of reference for exercising that right to defend their rights.
In order to correct this possible shortcoming, alternatives had been proposed, such as having the Community accede to the European Convention on Human Rights. Following the negative opinion of the Court of Justice in March 1996, the latter possibility was left unfounded.
Faced with this impasse, the German Presidency of the Council promoted during its term of office the idea of drafting a new Charter of Fundamental Rights for the Union. The objective was formally adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the Union at their meeting in Cologne in June 1999.
This Charter should include
(i) the rights of freedom and equality and the fundamental procedural principles as set out in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights;
(ii) basic rights corresponding to the citizens of the Union;
(iii) other economic and social rights.
Its drafting has been entrusted to a special body involving delegates from Member States and their national parliaments, from the European Commission as well as members of the European Parliament. The institution of the European Ombudsman is participating in this forum as an observer.
The aim is for this body to draw up a draft before the end of the year. This document, once adopted, will be the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which may, in the future, be a constituent part of the European Treaties.

5 PROPOSALS BY THE EUROPEAN OMBUDSMAN

This initiative is very positive in that it should serve to make all European citizens better aware of their rights. And from that perspective of the citizen, the drafting of this Charter would have to be approached, as I stated in my speech before the body in charge of its drafting on February 2.
Before that date it had already made a number of proposals, with the aim of correcting the existing situation and making the protection of human rights in the Union more effective from now on, without waiting for a lengthy process of drafting a complicated document.
He had thus suggested that a simple provision should be included in the Treaty. According to her, the Union and its institutions would be obliged to respect human rights agreements ratified by all, or by most, of the Member States. This would include not only the European Convention on Human Rights, but also other conventions of the Council of Europe, such as the European Social Charter, the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention for the Protection of Ethnic Minorities. It would also include United Nations instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as several ILO conventions.
I recognise, however, that the result would not be perfect, since the citizen would still be obliged to know several different texts in order to know his fundamental rights. Nor would there be clear mechanisms for the respect of those rights.
If the Union decides to move towards a Fundamental Bill of Rights, its provisions should be clear to citizens and binding on any EU institution or body.
To that end, I have proposed that the Charter include as a principle the citizen's right to good administration. In order to put the principle into practice, it would be necessary to enact certain implementing rules, such as those relating to good administrative behaviour, and also those governing access to information and documents.
Including this right in the charter could have a broad impact on all current and future Member States, helping to make the 21st century the "century of good governance".
Finally, this Charter should be provided with adequate means to ensure its respect, because rights remain worthless except for the existence of effective remedies. And I make particular reference to this point, because I find it regrettable what has happened to the promises made to the citizens of the Union in the Treaty of Amsterdam. In its view, the European Union is founded on the principles of freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law. And in that framework, decisions should be made "as openly as possible."
Despite these good intentions, Community legislation continues to be decided behind closed doors by the Council of Ministers. In my opinion, in a democracy, citizens should have the right to know the debates that lead to the adoption of laws.
The Treaty also gives citizens the constitutional right of access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents. This right, according to the Treaty itself, should be developed by regulatory means. However, in the light of the proposal recently published by the Commission, we are rather faced with a legislative development of the exceptions that the Community administration could apply to exclude the aforementioned right.
Finally, effective control of these rights often requires external monitoring of their respect. As experience in the Member States has shown, the protection of rights can be strengthened if there is a possibility of international supervision. The most developed and effective monitoring system is that set out in the European Convention on Human Rights. All EU Member States have accepted international control through the Convention system. It would therefore, in my view, be advisable for the EU institutions and bodies to be subject to similar supervision, which could arise through the EU’s accession to that convention.

6 CONCLUSION

Whatever happens at these high levels, for me the defence of the rights of European citizens must continue day by day. Therefore, the European Ombudsman, regardless of these constitutional changes in the Union, should continue to seek ways to ensure that the rights granted to European citizens are respected. Better protection of citizens and their rights can only be achieved if the institutions dedicated to this mission, including national and regional ombudsmen, establish closer ties of cooperation between them. I am convinced that the obstacles to many of the citizens' rights deriving from Community law - as is the case, for example, with the free movement of persons within the territory of the Union - could be improved through cooperation.
This trip to Galicia is intended to ensure closer cooperation with institutions such as Valedor do Pobo, which are benchmarks for the effective defence of the rights of European citizens.
The results of this cooperation are promising and show that the institution of the Ombudsman is in a position to face new challenges to enable the enjoyment of citizens' rights at all levels of the European Union.
Thank you for your attention.