Cuardaigh fiosrúcháin

The case concerned information provided by the European Commission about the status of two infringement complaints.

The Ombudsman found that the Commission could have provided more comprehensive information about the status of one of the complaints, notably in relation to the ongoing ‘multiple complaints procedure’ covering some of the issues raised in that complaint. However, it dealt with the complaints in a reasonable manner.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

The case concerned the decision of the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) not to allow a candidate, who was placed in COVID-19 quarantine, to reschedule her test in the context of a selection procedure for contract agent staff (CAST Permanent selection procedure).

The Ombudsman found that EPSO provided reasonable explanations as to why it was not able to provide an alternative testing date to the complainant. On that basis, the Ombudsman closed the inquiry with a finding that there was no maladministration by EPSO.

Bhí imní ar na gearánaigh, ar grúpa eagraíochtaí sochaí sibhialta iad, nach ndearna an Coimisiún Eorpach measúnú ar rioscaí cearta daonna sular thug sé tacaíocht do thíortha san Afraic chun cumais faireachais a fhorbairt, go háirithe i gcomhthéacs Chiste Iontaobhais Éigeandála an Aontais Eorpaigh don Afraic (EUTFA). D’áitigh na gearánaigh, sular aontaigh sé tacaíocht a thabhairt do thionscadail a bhféadfadh impleachtaí faireachais a bheith acu, amhail bunachair shonraí bithmhéadracha nó teicneolaíochtaí faireacháin fón póca, gurb cheart don Choimisiún measúnuithe riosca agus tionchair a dhéanamh roimh ré chun a áirithiú nach sáruithe ar chearta an duine a bheadh mar thoradh ar na tionscadail (amhail an ceart chun príobháideachta).

Bunaithe ar an bhfiosrúchán, bhain an tOmbudsman de thátal as nár leor na bearta a bhí i bhfeidhm chun a chinntiú go ndéanfaí measúnú ceart ar thionchar thionscadail EUFTA ar chearta an duine. Chun aghaidh a thabhairt ar na heasnaimh a d’aithin sí, rinne an tOmbudsman moladh maidir le feabhsú chun a chinntiú, do thionscadail Chiste Iontaobhais an Aontais Eorpaigh amach anseo, go bhfuil measúnú tionchair ar chearta an duine déanta roimh ré.

The case concerned how the Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union (CdT) evaluated tenders in two procurement procedures for the provision of translation services. The complainant argued that the CdT was inconsistent in its evaluation, given that it had assessed its tenders differently in the past. It also argued that the CdT had wrongly assessed the complainant’s tenders against two criteria set out in the calls for tenders.

The Ombudsman found that the CdT correctly followed the methodology it put in place for assessing the tenders in the two procedures. She also took the view that there was no indication of a manifest error in how the CdT assessed the complainant’s tenders.

On that basis, the Ombudsman considered that there was no maladministration by the CdT and she closed the case. Nevertheless, the Ombudsman trusts that the CdT will provide more detailed information to tenderers about its assessment in future procedures, as clearer information at an early stage may reduce the risk of complaints such as the one that led to this inquiry.