Želite vložiti pritožbo zoper institucijo ali organ EU?

Iskanje po preiskavah

Iskanje po besedilu

Vrsta dokumenta

Zadevna institucija ali organ

Postopek zaključen kot

Št. primera

Jezikovne različice

Datumski razpon

Ključne besede

Nespoštovanje zakonitosti [Člen 4 EKDRJU]

Iskanje s starimi ključnimi besedami (pred 2016)

Prikaz rezultatov 1–20 od 594

Decision in case 1107/2020/NH on the European Food Safety Authority’s (EFSA) alleged leak of confidential information on an active substance used in pesticides

Petek | 12 februar 2021

The case concerned an article published in a French newspaper, in which the journalist claimed to have had access to a confidential letter sent by the complainants to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as part of a process for renewing the approval of an active substance used in pesticides. The complainants contended that EFSA had leaked that letter to the press, and that it did not have appropriate safeguards in place against unauthorised disclosure of confidential information by staff members. The complainants also argued that EFSA had not been objective and impartial in its statements to the press.

The Ombudsman found that the complainants had sent the letter in question not only to EFSA, but to other actors as well. Since EFSA was not the only body in possession of the letter, it was not possible to determine with certainty that EFSA had leaked the letter to the press. EFSA had conducted two internal inquiries into possible leaks and concluded that there was no evidence the leaks had come from an EFSA staff member. The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest that EFSA lacked proper safeguards against leaks. Regarding EFSA’s statements to the press, the Ombudsman concluded that EFSA had not breached its duties of objectivity and impartiality.

The Ombudsman closed the inquiry with the finding that there had been no maladministration by EFSA in this case.

Decision in case 2272/2019/MIG on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation’s (Europol) public register of documents

Četrtek | 04 februar 2021

The complainant considered that the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation’s (Europol) public register of documents did not comply with EU rules on public access to documents.

The Ombudsman commended Europol’s past efforts towards establishing a register of documents and took note of its distinct characteristics, but also found room for improvement. She therefore proposed that Europol should update its register according to certain principles.

Europol agreed with the Ombudsman’s proposal and committed to take specific steps to implement the proposal in the short and medium term. The Ombudsman welcomed Europol’s decision to accept her proposal for a solution, and closed the inquiry.

Decision in case 2273/2019/MIG on the European Border and Coast Guard Agency’s (Frontex) public register of documents

Sreda | 03 februar 2021

The case concerned the European Border and Coast Guard Agency’s (Frontex) public register of documents. The complainant contacted Frontex and argued that its register of documents did not comply with EU rules on public access to documents, and that Frontex had not included information about sensitive documents in its annual reports on public access. The complainant also took issue with Frontex’s policy by which non-EU residents do not, under normal circumstances, have the right to request public access to documents. Frontex replied to the complainant but did not commit to making any changes.

The Ombudsman commended Frontex’s past efforts towards establishing a register of documents and took note of its distinct characteristics, but also found room for improvement. She therefore proposed that Frontex should update its register according to certain principles. She also proposed that Frontex should publish the number of sensitive documents it holds that are not included in the register, as required by the applicable rules.

Frontex agreed with the Ombudsman’s proposal and laid out a number of steps it intends to take to implement the proposal in the short, medium and long term. The Ombudsman welcomed Frontex’s decision to accept her proposal for a solution and, given that she also found no maladministration in relation to how it deals with requests for access from non-EU residents, closed the inquiry.

Decision in case 2208/2019/PL on how the European Personnel Selection Office calculated a candidate’s score in a selection procedure for EU staff

Ponedeljek | 01 februar 2021

The case concerned the European Personnel Selection Office’s (EPSO) calculation of the complainant’s score in a selection procedure for recruiting EU staff.

The Ombudsman found nothing to suggest a manifest error in how the selection board calculated the complainant’s score. The Ombudsman therefore closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

Odločba v zadevi 989/2020/AMF o tem, kako je Evropska komisija obravnavala dve pritožbi zaradi kršitev v zvezi z ribolovnimi praksami na Nizozemskem

Ponedeljek | 25 januar 2021

Zadeva se je nanašala na to, kako je Komisija obravnavala pritožbi zaradi kršitve zoper Nizozemsko v zvezi z uporabo električnega toka s strani ribiških plovil z vlečnimi mrežami z gredjo. Glavna skrb pritožnika je, da ribolov z električnim tokom sistemsko ogroža preživetje morskih ekosistemov in obalnih skupnosti, ki so odvisne od njih.

Komisija je pritožniku pojasnila, zakaj meni, da v tem primeru ne gre za kršitev zakonodaje EU, in ga obvestila, da namerava zadevi zaključiti.

Komisija ima široko polje proste presoje o tem, ali bo proti državi članici sprožila postopek za ugotavljanje kršitev. Evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic je sicer priznala pomembnost vprašanja, ki ga je izpostavil pritožnik, a hkrati ugotovila, da pri tem, kako je Komisija pojasnila svoja dejanja v tej zadevi, ni prišlo do nepravilnosti. Ker je Komisija utemeljila tudi zamudo pri zagotavljanju določenih pojasnil pritožniku, evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic ni našla nobenega razloga, ki bi upravičeval nadaljnje preiskave tega vidika zadeve.

Odločba v zadevi 1094/2020/DL o tem, kako Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije zagotavlja preglednost informacij o evropskih političnih strankah in fundacijah

Ponedeljek | 25 januar 2021

Zadeva se je nanašala na to, kako Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije izpolnjuje zahteve glede preglednosti, zlasti obveznosti glede razkritja in objave. Pritožnik je menil, da Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije informacij v zvezi z evropskimi političnimi strankami in fundacijami ni objavil na popoln, ažuren in uporabniku prijazen način.

Med preiskavo, ki jo je vodila evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic, se je Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije zavezal k izvedbi sprememb, namenjenih obravnavi nekaterih vprašanj, navedenih v pritožbi, in sicer je na primer vključil povezave do ustreznih informacij na spletnem mestu Evropskega parlamenta, na svojem spletnem mestu vstavil razdelke, namenjene zagotovitvi manjkajočih informacij, in pripravil predlogo za usklajeno pridobivanje informacij od evropskih političnih strank. Evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic se je tako odločila, da zadevo zaključi, saj nadaljnje preiskave niso bile upravičene.

Vendar pa je varuhinja človekovih pravic menila, da bi lahko Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije dodatno izboljšal svoje spletno mesto za zagotovitev, da so zagotovljene informacije jasne, popolne in primerljive ter da jih je mogoče pridobiti. Zato je podala tri predloge za izboljšave in zaprosila Organ za evropske politične stranke in evropske politične fundacije, naj poroča v roku šestih mesecev.

Decision in case 963/2020/VB on how the European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) assessed a candidate’s eligibility to participate in a selection procedure for EU staff in the field of audit

Sreda | 06 januar 2021

The case concerned the European Personnel Selection Office’s decision not to admit the complainant to a selection procedure for EU staff in the field of audit due to his lack of professional experience.

The Ombudsman found that the selection board had examined the information provided in the complainant’s application and assessed it against the eligibility criteria. The Ombudsman did not identify a manifest error in how the selection board assessed the application, and closed the inquiry with a finding of no maladministration.

Odločba v zadevi 1416/2019/VB glede tega, da je Evropska komisija projekt gradnje plinskega terminala na Hrvaškem vključila na seznam projektov skupnega interesa – čezmejnih projektov energetske infrastrukture – in nato sklenila, da temu projektu nameni sredstva EU

Sreda | 16 december 2020

Primer se je nanašal na projekt gradnje plavajočega terminala za utekočinjeni zemeljski plin na hrvaškem otoku. Pritožniki so bili zaskrbljeni, da je Evropska komisija projekt uvrstila na seznam projektov skupnega interesa – čezmejnih projektov energetske infrastrukture – in mu dodelila sredstva EU v okviru instrumenta za povezovanje Evrope (IPE). Pritožniki so menili, da projekt ne izpolnjuje ustreznih meril za vključitev na seznam projektov skupnega interesa in prejem sredstev EU.

Evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic je zadevo proučila in ni odkrila ničesar, kar bi nakazovalo, da je Komisija storila očitno napako pri presoji, ko je projekt vključila na seznam projektov skupnega interesa in mu dodelila sredstva EU. Ker je Komisija zdaj podala jasna pojasnila o argumentih pritožnikov, evropska varuhinja človekovih pravic ugotavlja, da nadaljnje preiskave v zvezi s to pritožbo niso upravičene.