¿Tiene una reclamación contra una institución u órgano de la UE?

Consultar investigaciones

Búsqueda del texto

Tipo de documento

Institución concernida

Tipo de acuerdo

Referencia del caso

Idioma

Límites de fecha

Palabras clave

Falta de respeto de los derechos lingüísticos [artículos 13 y 14 CEBCA]

O pruebe palabras clave antiguas (anteriores a 2016)

Mostrando 1 - 20 de 79 resultados

Multilingualism in the EU institutions

Miércoles | 24 junio 2020

Decision in case 773/2018/PL on how the European Union Aviation Safety Agency conducted a consultation on drones

Viernes | 29 noviembre 2019

The case concerned the way in which the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) carried out a public consultation. The Ombudsman’s inquiry covered (i) the fact that the consultation was in English only, (ii) EASA’s web-based application to submit comments and (iii) the amount of time stakeholders had to submit comments.

The Ombudsman concluded that citizens who do not speak English were hindered from contributing meaningfully to the consultation. She therefore made a suggestion to EASA to review its practice.

At the same time, the Ombudsman found EASA’s system for submitting comments to be reasonably user-friendly and the amount of time stakeholders had to submit comments to be sufficient. The Ombudsman thus closed the case.

Decision in case 2204/2018/TE on how the European Commission dealt with comments submitted under the notification procedure set up by the EU Single Market Transparency Directive

Jueves | 19 septiembre 2019

The European Commission runs a publicly accessible database, which informs interested parties about national technical regulations communicated to the Commission by EU Member States before their adoption. The database also allows interested parties to submit comments on the proposed national technical regulations.

The complainant is an international technical association for generation and storage of power and heat. It submitted comments on proposed technical rules that Germany intended to introduce.

As the German authorities had requested the Commission to keep information about the measures confidential, only limited information about these measures was accessible via the public database. The complainant took issue with this. The complainant was also concerned about how the Commission dealt with its comments, as it did not receive a substantive reply from the Commission after it made its comments.

The Ombudsman found no maladministration in how the Commission dealt with the complainant’s comments made under the notification procedure. The Ombudsman suggested, however, that the Commission provide clear information in its acknowledgements of receipt and on the database website, as to what interested parties can expect in terms of the Commission’s reply to their comments. Regarding the information that is made available, the Ombudsman expects the Commission carefully to monitor Member States’ use of confidential notifications under the Single Market Transparency Directive and to take the necessary measures in case of suspected abuse of the confidentiality provision.

Decisión en los asuntos 766/2018/PL y 1082/2018/PL sobre cómo la Agencia Europea de Sustancias Químicas realizó una consulta sobre una propuesta para restringir el plomo en las armas de fuego

Martes | 16 julio 2019

El caso se refiere a cómo la Agencia Europea de Sustancias Químicas (ECHA) realizó una consulta a las partes interesadas sobre una propuesta para restringir el plomo en las armas de fuego utilizadas en humedales. El demandante discrepaba en razón de la redacción de las preguntas y del hecho de que la consulta solo estaba disponible en inglés.

La Defensora del Pueblo considera que las preguntas y la oportunidad de enviar comentarios generales permitieron a los participantes expresar sus puntos de vista libremente. Sin embargo, con respecto a las lenguas, la Defensora del Pueblo consideró que la justificación de la ECHA para usar sólo el inglés era inadecuada.

Por lo tanto, la Defensora del Pueblo acoge con satisfacción el compromiso de la ECHA para considerar en el futuro la traducción a otros idiomas al menos en parte de sus consultas. Cuando la ECHA restringe el uso de las lenguas, debe establecer salvaguardas relevantes, como poner a disposición un resumen en todos las lenguasoficiales de la UE, poner a disposición material de apoyo relevante en tantas lenguas como sea posible y, sobre todo, dejar claro que se pueden enviar respuestas en cualquier lengua oficial de la UE. Este último elemento es un derecho fundamental.

La Defensora del Pueblo cerró el asunto con una sugerencia a la ECHA para evitar que en el futuro surjan problemas similares.

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

Martes | 16 julio 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.

Decision in case 1128/2018/TM on the European Commission’s webpages on ‘novel foods’ being available in English only

Jueves | 27 junio 2019

The case concerned the European Commission’s webpages on ‘novel foods’, types of food that are produced by new methods or have not previously been consumed by humans on a wider scale. The Commission’s webpages include an online application system for businesses seeking authorisation to market a novel food in the EU. The complainant was concerned that these webpages were available in English only.

In the course of the Ombudsman’s inquiry, the Commission started translating information on the authorisation procedure for novel foods into more EU official languages. The webpages were also revised to include the information that applications may be submitted in any EU language. The Ombudsman found that the Commission had taken steps to solve the complaint and closed the inquiry as settled.