Int għandek ilment kontra istituzzjoni jew korp tal-UE?

Tiftix ta’ inkjesti

Każ
Firxa tad-data
Keywords
Jew ipprova keywords antiki (Qabel l-2016)

Qed juri 1 - 20 minn 727 riżultati

Decision on how the EU Capacity Building Mission (EUCAP) in Somalia dealt with a procurement procedure for the provision of private security services (case 717/2022/LM)

L-Erbgħa | 30 Novembru 2022

The case concerned a procurement procedure organised by the EU Capacity Building Mission (EUCAP) in Somalia. The complainant submitted an ‘expression of interest’ to participate in the procurement procedure, and subsequently followed up with e-mails, but did not receive a reply from EUCAP Somalia.

From the documentation provided in the complaint, it would seem that the complainant sent its expression of interest and subsequent e-mails to the e-mail address indicated in the notice for the procedure. However, EUCAP Somalia claims that it never received the expression of interest, even after subsequent verification. It therefore appears that the electronic system used for submitting documents, via a functional mailbox, was not fit-for-purpose, as it failed to ensure that the complainant’s application was correctly received and stored.

It is not possible for the Ombudsman at this remove to assess what kind of technical problem occurred in this case. However, the Ombudsman urges EUCAP Somalia to carefully review the matter to identify the issue and, if it finds a problem with its current system, to put in place an electronic system for future procurement procedures that complies with the requirements in the EU Financial Regulation, concerning the authentication of bidders and the receipt of documents.

Id-Deċiżjoni dwar ir-rifjut tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea li tagħti aċċess pubbliku għal dokumenti li jikkonċernaw awditu tas-sajd pelaġiku u tat-tonn fl-Irlanda (każ 757/2022/MIG)

Il-Ġimgħa | 16 Settembru 2022

Il-każ kien jikkonċerna r-rifjut tal-Kummissjoni Ewropea li tagħti lill-ilmentatur aċċess pubbliku għal dokumenti li jikkonċernaw awditu tal-Kummissjoni u investigazzjoni amministrattiva mill-awtoritajiet Irlandiżi, li wassal biex il-Kummissjoni tirrevoka l-pjan ta’ kontroll Irlandiż għall-użin tal-prodotti tas-sajd. Il-Kummissjoni argumentat li s-segwitu għall-awditu kien għadu għaddej u li l-iżvelar tad-dokumenti jdgħajjef il-protezzjoni tal-iskop tal-ispezzjonijiet, tal-investigazzjonijiet u tal-awditi.

L-Ombudsman ivverifikat li l-awtoritajiet Irlandiżi għadhom ma implimentawx ir-rakkomandazzjonijiet li saru mill-Kummissjoni, u għaldaqstant, għadhom ma solvewx in-nuqqasijiet li identifikat. Dan ifisser li s-segwitu għall-awditu għadu għaddej. Minħabba li l-Kummissjoni tista’ tiftaħ proċedimenti ta’ ksur kontra l-Irlanda jekk dawn in-nuqqasijiet ma jiġux indirizzati biżżejjed, l-Ombudsman qieset li huwa raġonevoli li l-Kummissjoni tuża preżunzjoni ġenerali ta’ nuqqas ta’ żvelar. L-Ombudsman sabet ukoll li l-argumenti tal-ilmentatur ma kinux tali li jistabbilixxu li hemm interess pubbliku prevalenti fl-iżvelar.

Fid-dawl ta’ dan, l-Ombudsman ikkonkludiet li r-rifjut tal-Kummissjoni li tagħti aċċess pubbliku għad-dokumenti inkwistjoni kien ġustifikat u għalqet l-investigazzjoni tagħha u ma sabet l-ebda amministrazzjoni ħażina.