Imate li pritužbu protiv institucije ili tijela EU-a?

Pretraživanje istraga

Pretraživanje teksta

Vrsta dokumenta

Predmetna institucija

Vrsta rješenja

Broj slučaja

Jezik

Raspon datuma

Ključne riječi

Komunikacija

Ili pokušajte sa starim ključnim riječima (prije 2016.)

Prikazuju se 1 - 20 od 63 rezultata

Decision in case 1498/2019/NH on the European Parliament not sending its reply to an access to documents request by e-mail

Četvrtak | 28 svibnja 2020

The case concerned the refusal by the European Parliament to send a decision refusing public access to documents by e-mail.

The Ombudsman found that Parliament’s reply to the complainant was reasonable in the given context, as the complainant had already received the decision by registered post.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with the conclusion that there had been no maladministration by Parliament in this case.

Odluka u predmetu 1484/2019/UNK o načinu na koji je Europska komisija postupila sa zahtjevom za potpuni javni pristup nacrtima članka o direktivi o autorskim pravima objavljenima na mrežnom mjestu Komisije

Ponedjeljak | 02 prosinca 2019

Predmet se odnosio na odluku Europske komisije da redigira imena svojih članova osoblja u dokumentu prije nego što je podnositelju pritužbe odobrila pristup tom dokumentu.

Ombudsman je smatrao da je Komisija pravilno postupila redigiranjem imena. Stoga je zaključio istragu utvrdivši da nije bilo nepravilnosti.

Odluka 552/2018/MIG o odbijanju Europske komisije da odobri javni pristup dokumentima koji se odnose na njemački provedbeni zakon o društvenim mrežama

Srijeda | 20 studenoga 2019

Predmet se također odnosio na javni pristup dokumentima u posjedu Europske komisije koji se odnose na njemački provedbeni zakon o društvenim mrežama, nacionalni propis čiji je cilj suzbijati lažne vijesti na društvenim mrežama.

Ombudsman je predložio rješenje te zamolio Komisiju da preispita svoje (djelomično) odbijanje da odobri javni pristup dokumentima. Komisija nije odgovorila u roku koji je odredio Ombudsman. Ombudsman je zatim izdao preporuku Komisiji.

Komisija je odgovorila da ne prihvaća Ombudsmanov prijedlog.

Ombudsman izražava žaljenje što Komisija nije prihvatila njegovu preporuku te i dalje smatra da se radilo o nepravilnosti u postupanju.

Decision in case 1731/2018/FP on the refusal by the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency to grant public access to the documents submitted by a public undertaking for a funding approval in the context of a call for proposals by the Connecting Europe Facility

Petak | 04 listopada 2019

The case concerned the refusal by the Innovation and Networks Executive Agency (INEA) to grant public access to documents submitted by a national cybersecurity authority that was seeking funding from INEA.

The Ombudsman inquired into the issue and proposed that INEA should partially disclose the requested documents, redacting only information that it considers to be genuinely commercially sensitive or personal data.

INEA rejected the Ombudsman’s proposal, arguing that most of the information that could be disclosed was already in the public domain and the proposed partial disclosure would impose a disproportionate administrative burden on INEA. It also said that it accepted the arguments of the national cybersecurity authority regarding the likely damage disclosure would cause to its commercial interests.

The Ombudsman found INEA’s refusal to grant even partial access to the requested documents to be maladministration and recommended that INEA partially disclose the relevant Grant application.

INEA rejected the Ombudsman’s recommendation. Consequently, the Ombudsman now closes the case, confirming her finding of maladministration.

Recommendation of the European Ombudsman in case 552/2018/MIG on the European Commission’s refusal of public access to documents concerning the German Network Enforcement Act

Utorak | 11 lipnja 2019

The case concerned a refusal by the Commission, in 2017, to give a Member of the European Parliament public access to Commission documents regarding a new German social media law. The complainant considered that the Commission had failed to identify all the documents falling within the scope of her request. Regarding those documents it did identify, she considered that the Commission had wrongly redacted the documents.

The Ombudsman found that the Commission had failed to identify all the documents falling within the scope of the complainant’s request. She also found that the redactions made by the Commission were excessive. She thus proposed that the Commission reassess the scope of the request and reconsider its decision to (partially) deny access to the identified documents.

The Commission did not follow this solution proposal. As the Ombudsman considers the Commission’s handling of the complainant’s access request to constitute maladministration, she makes a corresponding recommendation and expresses her concern at the inordinate length of time the Commission has taken in dealing with this matter.

Decision in case 2124/2017/KT on the treatment of certain journalists by the European Parliament’s Information Office in Cyprus

Četvrtak | 25 travnja 2019

The complaint was about how the European Parliament’s Information Office in Cyprus selected journalists to travel to a conference in Brussels organised by Parliament. The complainant considered that the Information Office´s outreach policy is not transparent, especially when it comes to selecting journalists to travel abroad to cover its activities.

The Ombudsman found that Parliament’s criteria for selecting journalists were reasonable and concluded that there was no maladministration.