Paris, 7 December 2005

Introduction

Dear Mr President,

Dear Members,

It is a great honour and privilege for me to be with you today. Thank you very much for inviting me to address your delegation to share some thoughts on the 10th anniversary of the institution of the European Ombudsman.

I am all the more pleased with this opportunity because I consider the role of this delegation and its 36 Members to be of paramount importance in bringing citizens closer to the European institutions and in familiarising them with the Union in general.

The intense debate that animated France in the run-up to the referendum on the European Constitution showed how much citizens are interested in the governance of Europe. The negative results of the referendum in France and the Netherlands paved the way for a period of reflection. It seems essential to me that citizens are better informed and feel more involved in the decision-making process at European level. It is our duty to take up this challenge and show them that the European Union belongs to them and has a positive impact on their daily lives. The European Ombudsman contributes to this objective by virtue of the role conferred on him by the Maastricht Treaty, which created the concept of European citizenship and established the right to complain to the Ombudsman with a view to bringing the Union closer to its citizens.

History of the institution of the Ombudsman in Europe

Although the European Ombudsman has only recently arrived on the European institutional scene, he can build on a long tradition of mediation institutions in Europe, the first of which was established in Sweden in 1809. Finland followed this example in 1919, then it was Denmark's turn in 1955.

At the global level, the institution of the Ombudsman is now present in more than 120 countries.

Among the six founding countries of the European Union, it was France that first established its own institution of the Ombudsman of the Republic in 1973. Since then, the expansion of the institution of the Ombudsman has been particularly impressive within the European Union. At the beginning of the 1990s, during the negotiations on the Maastricht Treaty, the institution of the Ombudsman was present at national level in only a small majority of the Member States; 7 out of 12. There is now a national ombudsperson in 23 of the 25 Member States and the four candidate countries (Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Turkey) have either already established an ombudsperson or announced their intention to do so.

The role of the European Ombudsman

The institution of the European Ombudsman has been active since September 1995, first under the direction of my predecessor Mr Jacob Söderman, former National Ombudsman of Finland, and, since 1 April 2003, under my own responsibility.

The main role of the European Ombudsman is to investigate complaints of maladministration by EU institutions and bodies such as the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union.

Any citizen of the Union or any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in the territory of a Member State may refer the matter to the European Ombudsman.

Complaints of maladministration may be based on unnecessary delays, discrimination, abuse of power, negligence, or denial of information.

We are able to help about 70% of complainants. This is despite the fact that the mandate of the European Ombudsman is limited to the institutions and bodies of the European Union, which means that only 25% of the complaints addressed to me are likely to be investigated by my services. The majority of other complaints are directed against Member States' administrations, as citizens find it difficult to understand that, even if Community law is at stake at national or regional level, such complaints fall within the remit of national and regional ombudsmen, not the European Ombudsman. It is for this reason that we work closely with ombudsmen at national and regional level, either by transferring complaints directly to them or by advising complainants to address them.

It should be noted that French legislation was amended in 2000 (Law 2000-321 of 12 April 2000) in order to allow the European Ombudsman to transfer a complaint directly to his French counterpart.

I would also like to make it clear that the European Ombudsman is not a superior body to similar institutions at national level. It does not, therefore, constitute a remedy for matters which fall within the jurisdiction of courts or ombudsmen at national level. However, in order to offer the best possible service to European citizens, I maintain very close cooperation with all the ombudsmen of the Member States and, in this context, work closely with the Ombudsman of the Republic, Mr Jean-Paul Delevoye.

Example of complaint

In order to show you concretely the resolutions that the European Ombudsman can obtain for citizens, let me give you a recent example.

A French association complained to the Ombudsman following a request for partial reimbursement of a Commission grant. The association had received financial support from the Commission to organise a social forum. Following an audit of the project, the Commission requested reimbursement of part of the grant which corresponded to ineligible expenditure.

The complainant contested this claim for reimbursement. He considered that the Commission had not taken into account or even acknowledged receipt of the additional information and supporting documents which he had sent to him.

In response to the Ombudsman's request, the Commission explained that, having examined all the documents, it could not accept them, since the complainant had not provided proof of the costs incurred. The complainant subsequently sent some supporting documents previously requested by the auditors. The Commission then reopened the case, took into account the evidence and substantially reduced the amount to be reimbursed.

Alongside the courts in the Member States and at EU level, the European Ombudsman and his counterparts play a key role in promoting and protecting the rights of European citizens. I believe that it is not only my responsibility to react to the complaints I receive - that is to say, the reactive role of the European Ombudsman - but that I also have a "proactive" role, that of promoting citizens' rights and ensuring that these rights are known and protected effectively.

The European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour

The Ombudsman's ability to open own-initiative inquiries contributes to the proactive nature of his function.

The European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour (approved by the European Parliament in September 2001) is an example of an own-initiative inquiry which, by drafting simple rules, crystallizes citizens' rights. At the same time, it provides the administration with a document containing precise rules concerning the duties of public servants towards the public. The Code was republished in 2005 and, to date, more than 100,000 copies of this new edition have been distributed.

The Ombudsman’s proactive role also includes his participation as an Observer in the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and which enabled him to exert a significant influence on the part of the text concerning Citizenship.

The Ombudsman proposed to the Convention that the Charter should include among the fundamental rights, in addition to the so-called "classical" rights, the right to an open, responsible administration at the service of citizens. This proposal was linked to the concept that citizens have the right to have their affairs handled properly, fairly and expeditiously.

This fundamental right to good administration is now enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter.

Ensuring good administration contributes to making the rights contained in the Charter, including economic and social rights, more tangible and effective.

The European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour, which I mentioned earlier, explains to citizens what this right to good administration means in practice and what they can expect, in practice, from the European administration.

Ombudsmen and courts

I think it is important to say a few words about the relationship between the courts and mediators who have different but complementary functions. They have in common the defence and promotion of the rule of law and the fact that they are outside the public administrative apparatus of which they are independent control mechanisms.

The first distinction is that the main area of activity of the courts is to apply the law, whereas the corresponding area of the Ombudsman is the promotion of good administration or, conversely, the avoidance of maladministration.

In fact, as the case law of almost all countries where the rule of law and democracy prevail demonstrates, illegality and maladministration overlap. The concept of maladministration extends, however, beyond questions of legality. It also encompasses the idea that public administration has a mission to serve the citizen and that, in their day-to-day relations with the public, public bodies must ensure that citizens are treated properly and fully enjoy their rights.

In other words, the principles of good administration require more from the public administration than just compliance with the law. While illegality necessarily involves maladministration, finding maladministration does not necessarily imply that there has been illegality.

The second distinction is that only the interpretation of the law by the courts is authoritative and that only the courts are empowered to make enforceable decisions, and therefore to impose sanctions. Ombudsmen, on the other hand, although guided by the decisions and jurisprudence of the courts, can only give advice and recommendations to State institutions within their jurisdiction.

The European Ombudsman and the European Parliament

The European Ombudsman could be said to have the task of an influential judiciary, which implies and implies a close and privileged working relationship with the European Parliament. The institutional relationship between the European Ombudsman and the European Parliament is indeed essential both to support the Ombudsman’s independence and to encourage the administration to follow his recommendations.

When the institutions do not follow his recommendations, the European Ombudsman's ultimate weapon is to send a special report to the European Parliament.

Since its inception, the Ombudsman has developed close working relations with the European Parliament and has addressed 12 special reports to the European Parliament so far.

I would like to briefly inform you of my latest special report to the European Parliament, which is directly linked to the role of the European Ombudsman in promoting the quality of democracy.

This special report follows a complaint by a German MEP and the youth group of a German political party. The complaint was directed against the Council of the European Union and concerned the fact that the latter does not meet publicly when acting in its legislative capacity. At the end of my inquiry, I considered that Article 1(2) of the Treaty on European Union provides for the general principle that the Council and the other institutions and bodies of the Union must take their decisions "as openly as possible". I also considered that the past actions of the Council itself have shown that measures to increase the transparency of its legislative activity must be taken, and can be taken, within the framework of the existing provisions of the Treaties and of Community law. My investigation provided the Commission with an opportunity to present the reasons why it should not amend its by-laws to open the meetings in question to the public, but the reasons given were not convincing.

Having submitted my special report to the European Parliament on 4 October, I hope that it will succeed in persuading the EU Presidency to take the initiative to increase the transparency of the Council's legislative activity.

The 10th anniversary of the European Ombudsman

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen,

The institution of the European Ombudsman is celebrating its tenth anniversary this autumn, and many results have been achieved for European citizens over the past decade. The Ombudsman's inquiries and initiatives have resulted in a more open, accountable and citizen-friendly European administration. By promoting more transparency, ensuring fair treatment of contracting parties and grant beneficiaries, ensuring equality in recruitment procedures, and stressing that institutions and bodies must give reasons for their decisions, the Ombudsman has worked to ensure that citizens' complaints are dealt with "impartially, fairly and within a reasonable time by the institutions and bodies of the European Union". This is explicitly provided for in the "right to good administration" contained in Article 41 of the Charter, of which I have just spoken.

Since 1995, the Ombudsman has dealt with more than 20,000 complaints and tens of thousands of requests for information. I am convinced that the first European Ombudsman, Jacob Söderman, is quite right to say that the Ombudsman has become "a significant and respected actor on the European scene".

To mark the tenth anniversary of the European Ombudsman, I have decided to organise several events in The Hague, Brussels and at the European Ombudsman's headquarters in Strasbourg. Each event was targeted to a key audience for our institution - national ombudsmen, European Union institutions, bodies and agencies, academia, our national, regional, departmental and local partners in France, journalists covering European affairs, NGOs, lobbyists, representatives of civil society, representatives of European regions and other potential users of the European Ombudsman.

The last two events - a seminar with journalists and a public workshop with potential users of the Ombudsman - took place yesterday afternoon in Brussels and provided several avenues to explore and develop to better serve citizens during the next decade of the European Ombudsman.

The tenth anniversary was also commemorated by the publication of a book tracing the genesis of the Ombudsman and the progress made since his creation. This book, the result of a workshop I organised in Strasbourg in June 2004 with the institution's founding mothers and fathers, was published in English in September. The French version will be released in the spring of 2006 and I will be happy to send you each a copy. For the moment, I take the opportunity of my presence here to give you a copy of the current version.

The European Ombudsman at the service of French citizens

When I took office on April 1, 2003, I made citizen information one of my priorities. I hope that our meeting today will help to raise awareness of the European Ombudsman in France. I would also like to point out that the European Ombudsman not only has his seat in Strasbourg, but is actually there and works there permanently with a vast majority of his staff.

Nevertheless, even if the European Ombudsman is established in France, his work remains little known in that country. According to the Eurobarometer, only 31% of French people have heard of the European Ombudsman, while the European average is 37%. The French are among those who - in proportion to the population - complain the least to the European Ombudsman.

In order to raise public awareness of the role of the European Ombudsman, I visited Paris in December last year at the invitation of the Ombudsman of the Republic, whose services organised a programme of meetings, including meetings with members of the executive, legislative and judicial branches, as well as public debates and meetings with the press. This initiative has certainly contributed to better informing French citizens about the work of the European Ombudsman.

This visit was the most recent manifestation of close cooperation with the French media under the ombudsmen of the Republic who have held this post since 1995 – Mr Jacques Pelletier, Mr Bernard Stasi and since 2004, Mr Delevoye.

I am also very pleased to inform you that the next seminar of national ombudsmen of the Union, which takes place every two years, will be held in Strasbourg in 2007, and that it will be organised jointly by the European Ombudsman and the Ombudsman of the Republic.

The future

Much remains to be done to ensure a first-class European administration and to meet the challenge of communicating with 450 million citizens in 25 countries and 21 languages. The institution of the European Ombudsman will continue its efforts to bring every inquiry we conduct a little closer to our goal of making the fundamental right to good administration a reality. And we will continue to develop and build on the European Network of Ombudsmen, so that all complainants can turn to a body that can quickly and effectively resolve their problems.

I hope that my presentation will have helped to clarify the information you already had on the work of the European Ombudsman, which, as you see, is not limited purely to dealing with complaints.

Mr President, ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for your attention.