Tiftix ta’ inkjesti

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.

L-ilmentaturi, grupp ta’ organizzazzjonijiet tas-soċjetà ċivili, kienu mħassba li l-Kummissjoni Ewropea ma vvalutatx ir-riskji għad-drittijiet tal-bniedem qabel ma pprovdiet appoġġ lill-pajjiżi Afrikani biex jiżviluppaw kapaċitajiet ta’ sorveljanza, speċjalment fil-kuntest tal-Fond Fiduċjarju ta’ Emerġenza għall-Afrika (EUTFA). L-ilmentaturi talbu li, qabel ma jaqblu li jappoġġjaw proġetti b’implikazzjonijiet ta’ sorveljanza potenzjali, bħal bażijiet ta’ data bijometriċi jew teknoloġiji ta’ monitoraġġ bil-mowbajls, il-Kummissjoni kellha twettaq valutazzjonijiet tar-riskju u tal-impatt minn qabel biex tiżgura li l-proġetti ma jirriżultawx fi ksur tad-drittijiet tal-bniedem (bħad-dritt għall-privatezza).

Abbażi tal-inkjesta, l-Ombudsman ikkonkludiet li l-miżuri fis-seħħ ma kinux suffiċjenti biex jiżguraw li l-impatt fuq id-drittijiet tal-bniedem tal-proġetti tal-EUFTA ġie vvalutat kif xieraq. Biex tindirizza n-nuqqasijiet li identifikat, l-Ombudsman għamlet suġġeriment għal titjib biex jiġi żgurat li, għal proġetti futuri tal-Fond Fiduċjarju tal-UE, ikun hemm valutazzjoni xierqa tal-impatt fuq id-drittijiet tal-bniedem minn qabel.

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.