Vai vēlaties iesniegt sūdzību par ES iestādi vai struktūru?

Meklēt izmeklēšanas

Lieta
Datumu amplitūda
Atslēgas vārdi
Vai izmēģiniet vecus atslēgvārdus (līdz 2016. gadam)

Rādīt 1 - 20 no 70 rezultātiem

Decision in case 616/2020/DL on how the European Commission dealt with a contractor that had not paid its consultants

Trešdiena | 19 maijs 2021

The complainant worked as an expert for an external contractor to the EU Delegation to Ghana. Not having been paid for her work, the complainant turned to the Ombudsman, claiming that the EU Delegation had failed to ensure that the external contractor respects its obligations towards the experts.

The Ombudsman found that both the EU Delegation and the European Commission had acted in accordance with the applicable rules when withholding some payments under the contract. She also found that they had taken appropriate action vis-a-vis the contractor to try to resolve the situation that affected the complainant. The Ombudsman considers that the Commission has adequate mechanisms in place to monitor contractors, and she trusts the Commission will use these mechanisms to monitor the situation and to take action within its remit if needed.

The Ombudsman therefore closed the case with a finding of no maladministration.

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

Ceturtdiena | 28 maijs 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.

Lēmums lietā 1484/2019/UNK par Eiropas Komisijas rīcību attiecībā uz prasību sniegt pilnīgu publisku piekļuvi Komisijas tīmekļa vietnē publicētajiem raksta projektiem par autortiesību direktīvu

Pirmdiena | 02 decembris 2019

Lieta attiecās uz Eiropas Komisijas lēmumu rediģēt Komisijas darbinieku vārdus no dokumenta, pirms sūdzības iesniedzējam tika piešķirta publiska piekļuve tam.

Ombude konstatēja, ka Komisija pamatoti neatklāja darbinieku vārdus. Tāpēc viņa slēdza izmeklēšanu, nekonstatējot nekādas administratīvas kļūmes.

Lēmums lietā 552/2018/MIG par Eiropas Komisijas atteikumu piešķirt publisku piekļuvi dokumentiem saistībā ar Vācijas Tīkla izpildes aktu

Trešdiena | 20 novembris 2019

Lieta attiecās uz lūgumu nodrošināt publisku piekļuvi Eiropas Komisijas rīcībā esošajiem dokumentiem saistībā ar Vācijas Tīkla izpildes aktu, kas ir valsts tiesību akts viltus ziņu apkarošanai sociālajos tīklos.

Ombude ieteica risinājumu, lūdzot Komisiju pārskatīt tās (daļējo) atteikumu publiskas piekļuves piešķiršanai dokumentiem. Komisija neatbildēja ombudes noteiktajā termiņā. Tad ombude iesniedza ieteikumu Komisijai.

Komisija atbildēja, ka tā nepiekrīt ombudes ieteikumam.

Ombude pauž nožēlu, ka Komisija nav ņēmusi vērā viņas ieteikumu. Viņa uztur spēkā konstatējumus par administratīvu kļūmi.

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

Piektdiena | 04 oktobris 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.