Strasbourg, 16 March 2004

Dear Mr R.,

On 27 June 2003, I received your complaint against the European Commission, concerning the Commission's alleged failure to reply to your letter of 28 February 2003.

On 22 July 2003, I forwarded your complaint to the President of the European Commission. The Commission sent its opinion on 26 November 2003, which I sent to you with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished by 31 January 2004. It appears that no observations have been received from you.

I am writing now to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

On 20 December 2002, the Sicilian regional councillor for the Arts, the Environment and the Education adopted Administrative decree n° 59. The decree foresees the creation of a list of expert cataloguers who would carry out a census of the cultural and environmental resources of Sicily. According to the complainant, the list of experts was to be created by renewing the contracts of cataloguers who had been working for the last three years, without taking into account the experience and the results obtained by more than 700 cataloguers who had been employed by the regional administration during the last ten years. The complainant, who was not among the cataloguers put on the list and who considered that this procedure was unlawful, complained to the Procura of Palermo and to the Italian Court of Auditors.

On 28 February 2003, the complainant also wrote to the Commission, alleging that the above-mentioned Administrative decree n° 59 infringed Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1685/2000 of 28 July 2000 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 as regards eligibility of expenditure of operations co-financed by the Structural Funds(2).

In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the complainant alleged that the Commission had failed to reply to his letter.

THE INQUIRY

The European Commission's opinion

In its opinion on the complaint, the Commission made in summary the following points:

The complainant's letter of 28 February 2003, registered by the Commission's services on 12 March 2003, had been addressed to several Italian authorities and copied to the Commission. Since the complainant had not asked the Commission to take any action, the Commission had decided not to react to his letter.

However, when it had been informed of the complaint made to the Ombudsman, the institution had promptly dealt with the complainant's letter and had replied to it on 19 August 2003. In its reply to the complainant, the Commission explained the reasons for the delay and informed him that his letter was forwarded to the competent services to be treated as a formal complaint. On the basis of the information in the possession of the institution, a census of the cultural and environmental resources of Sicily appeared to be part of a programme co-financed by Community structural funds. The Commission would therefore contact the competent regional authorities in order to ascertain whether the relevant measure was in accordance with Community legislation. The complainant would be kept informed of the results of the Commission's inquiry.

The complainant's observations

It appears that no observations have been received from the complainant on the Commission's opinion.

THE DECISION

1 The alleged failure by the Commission to reply to the complainant's letter

1.1 On 28 February 2003, the complainant sent a letter to the European Commission. In his complaint, the complainant alleged that the Commission had failed to reply to this letter.

1.2 In its opinion, the Commission explained that the letter sent by the complainant on 28 February 2003 had been addressed to several Italian authorities and only copied to the Commission. Since the complainant had not asked the Commission to take any action, the Commission had decided not to react to his letter. However, when informed of the complaint to the Ombudsman, the institution had dealt with the complainant's letter and had replied to it on 19 August 2003.

Furthermore, the Commission explained which actions it would take as regards the issues raised by the complainant and that it would keep him informed of the inquiry.

1.3 The complainant sent no observations on the Commission's opinion.

1.4 The Ombudsman notes that the Commission has explained that it did not reply to the complainant's letter of 28 February 2003 because the latter had been only copied to it and because the complainant had not asked the institution to take any action. In the Ombudsman's view, this explanation, which has not been contested by the complainant, appears to be reasonable. Furthermore, the Ombudsman notes that the Commission has now dealt with the complainant's letter and replied to it.

2 Conclusion

On the basis of the Ombudsman's inquiries into this complaint, there appears to have been no maladministration by the European Commission. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

The President of the European Commission will also be informed of this decision.

Yours sincerely,

 

P. Nikiforos DIAMANDOUROS

---

(1) OJ L 161 of 26 June 1999, p. 1-42.

(2) OJ L 193 of 29 July 2000, p. 39-48.