Norite pateikti skundą dėl ES institucijos ar įstaigos?

Ieškoti tyrimų

Byla
Laikotarpis
Raktiniai žodžiai
Arba pabandykite senus raktinius žodžius (iki 2016 m.)

Rodoma 1 - 20 iš 171 rezultato (-ų)

Recommendation on how the European Defence Agency handled the applications of its former Chief Executive to take on senior positions at Airbus (OI/3/2021/KR)

Antradienis | 13 liepos 2021

The Ombudsman conducted an inquiry on her own initiative into the decision of the European Defence Authority (EDA) to allow its former Chief Executive to take up two senior positions with Airbus, an aerospace company.

The Ombudsman’s inquiry also looked into how the EDA dealt with the fact that the former Chief Executive took up his new positions before the EDA had authorised him to do so, which is a breach of the EDA’s Staff Regulations.

The Ombudsman found that the conditions imposed on the former Chief Executive by the EDA in its authorising decision were insufficient when measured against the risks, and could not be monitored and enforced. There were also shortcomings in how the EDA assessed the risk of conflicts of interest.

The EDA should have instead applied stronger conditions and forbidden the former Chief Executive from taking up the position which gave rise to the greatest risk of conflict with the EDA’s legitimate interest. Not doing so amounted to maladministration by the EDA.

Based on these findings, the Ombudsman issued two recommendations:

(i) In future, the EDA should forbid its senior staff from taking up positions after their term of office where a clear conflict of interest arises with the legitimate interests of the EDA;

(ii) The EDA should set out the criteria for forbidding such moves, in order to give clarity to senior staff. Applicants for senior EDA posts should be informed of the criteria when they apply.

Sprendimas dėl Europos išorės veiksmų tarnybos (EIVT) atsisakymo leisti visuomenei visapusiškai susipažinti su metine ataskaita dėl ES nuolatinio struktūrizuoto bendradarbiavimo (PESCO) įgyvendinimo 2020 m. (byla 786/2021/LM)

Ketvirtadienis | 08 liepos 2021

Skundo pateikėjas siekė, kad visuomenei būtų leista susipažinti su metine ataskaita dėl ES nuolatinio struktūrizuoto bendradarbiavimo (PESCO) įgyvendinimo 2020 m.

Europos išorės veiksmų tarnyba (EIVT) atskleidė įžanginius ir bendruosius ataskaitos teiginius ir redagavo likusias dalis. Ji teigė, kad redaguotų dalių atskleidimas galėtų pakenkti viešųjų interesų apsaugai tarptautinių santykių, gynybos ir karinių reikalų atžvilgiu.

Patikrinus dokumentą patvirtinta, kad ataskaitoje yra itin neskelbtinos informacijos, galinčios pakenkti gynybos ir kariniams reikalams. Ombudsmenė nustatė, kad visapusiškas dokumente esančios informacijos atskleidimas leistų priešiškoms trečiosioms šalims ir subjektams numatyti išteklius, kuriuos ES galės panaudoti, ir pagerinti savo pajėgumus, kad būtų neutralizuotas ES išorės politinis ir strateginis požiūris. Ombudsmenė taip pat nustatė, kad tai, jog EIVT remiasi tarptautinių santykių išimtimi, yra pagrįsta. Taigi ombudsmenė padarė išvadą, kad EIVT pagrįstai neleido susipažinti su dokumentais, ir užbaigė tyrimą, pateikdama išvadą, kad netinkamo administravimo nenustatyta.

Decision in case 163/2020/NH on the failure by the European External Action Service (EEAS) to reply to correspondence concerning alleged irregularities in a disciplinary investigation in an EU civilian mission

Penktadienis | 04 birželio 2021

The case concerned the failure by the European External Action Service (EEAS) to reply to a letter concerning a disciplinary investigation that had taken place in 2017 in an EU civilian mission.

The Ombudsman found that the EEAS had repeatedly failed to reply to the complainant’s letters. Even if the EEAS considered that it could not reply on the substance, due to ongoing legal proceedings, it should have replied and explained this to the complainant. The failure to do so was maladministration.

Since, in the context of the inquiry, the EEAS explained why it believes it cannot give a substantive reply to the complainant, the Ombudsman did not make a recommendation to this end. She trusts, however, that the EEAS will take this finding on board going forward.