Vous souhaitez déposer une plainte contre une institution ou un organe de l’Union européenne ?
Rechercher des enquêtes
Affichage 1 - 20 des 187 résultats
How the European Commission dealt with complaints against Poland as regards the EU-funded surveying works in south-eastern Poland and the Polish judiciary system
Samedi | 06 août 2022
The European Commission’s failure to reply to a letter concerning the EU-funded project in Southern Spain
Mardi | 02 août 2022
Decision on the European Commission’s failure to take action against Spain for its abuse of fixed-term contracts in the Spanish public sector (349/2022/PL)
Mercredi | 06 juillet 2022
Letter from the European Ombudsman to the European Commission on its failure to take action against Spain for its abuse of fixed-term contracts in the Spanish public sector
Mercredi | 06 juillet 2022
Absence de mesures de la Commission européenne à l’encontre de l’Espagne pour recours abusif aux contrats à durée déterminée dans le secteur public espagnol
Lundi | 14 mars 2022
Absence d’accusé de réception de la Commission européenne concernant une plainte relative à la délivrance présumée, en Italie, de certificats COVID numériques de l’UE falsifiés
Vendredi | 04 mars 2022
Décision concernant la manière dont une Délégation de l’Union européenne a traité le remplacement d’un expert en raison d’un prétendu conflit d’intérêt (plainte : 1423/2021/JN)
Vendredi | 26 novembre 2021
Façon dont l’Office européen de lutte antifraude (OLAF) a mené une enquête sur une fraude présumée commise par deux membres du personnel de l’UE
Mardi | 06 juillet 2021
Decision in case 193/2021/AMF on the European Anti-Fraud Office´s refusal to provide public access to a call for tenders for an EU funded project that was the object of an investigation
Jeudi | 17 juin 2021
The case concerned a request for access to a public call for tenders for an EU funded project that was investigated by the European Anti-Fraud Office. OLAF had argued that providing the complainant with the call (which is already in the public domain) would damage its decision-making process and the purpose of its investigations because it would allow the complainant to identify the project in question and therefore the subject matter of the investigation. The Ombudsman´s inquiries team asked OLAF to clarify how its decision making process and the purpose of its investigations could be damaged when the call was public and the investigation was closed in 2019.
Taking into account the arguments put forward by OLAF in its reply to the Ombudsman´s inquiries team, the Ombudsman agreed that the disclosure of the call would undermine OLAF´s decision-making process and the purpose of its investigations. Therefore, the inquiry was closed with a finding of no maladministration.
Refus de l’Office européen de lutte antifraude d’accorder l’accès public à un appel d’offres pour un projet financé par l’UE qui faisait l’objet d’une enquête.
Jeudi | 18 mars 2021
Decision of the European Ombudsman in the case 119/2020/JN on how the European Court of Auditors handled a complaint about alleged irregularities in a public procurement procedure
Jeudi | 11 février 2021
Die Entscheidung des Europäischen Amtes für Betrugsbekämpfung (OLAF), keine Untersuchung eines möglichen Missbrauchs von EU-Mitteln in Dänemark einzuleiten
Mardi | 05 janvier 2021
Absence de réponse par l’Office européen de lutte anti-fraude (OLAF) à une demande d’informations concernant une activité d’enquête
Mercredi | 02 décembre 2020
Décision de la Commission européenne d’inclure le plaignant dans le système de détection rapide et d'exclusion (EDES)
Vendredi | 27 novembre 2020
Le refus de l´OLAF de donner accès à un rapport final d’enquête à la personne concernée par l’enquête en question
Jeudi | 19 novembre 2020
Decision in case 1597/2020/EIS on how the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union replied to a request for legal help in a personal matter
Jeudi | 08 octobre 2020
Decision in case OI/2/2020/NH on the European Anti-Fraud Office’s refusal to grant public access to documents related to its investigation of possible links between Japan Tobacco International (JTI) and a family member of the Syrian President
Mercredi | 29 juillet 2020
The case concerned how the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) handled a request by a journalist for public access to documents about an OLAF investigation into a tobacco product manufacturer and its possible links to a family member of the Syrian President.
OLAF invoked the general presumption that public access to the requested documents would be particularly detrimental to its ability to fulfil its mission to fight fraud in the public interest. OLAF therefore concluded, without assessing each document individually, that access to the documents could not be granted.
The Ombudsman found that OLAF had correctly applied the EU rules on public access to documents. After reviewing the final OLAF report in this case, the Ombudsman found that only one short section was relevant to the complainant’s request.
The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with a finding that there had not been maladministration by OLAF. She nevertheless suggested to OLAF that it assess the relevant section of the report and consider granting public access to it.