sign in sign up
<<
Home , Ombudsman

European Ombudsman

Speech of the -The Ombudsman concept and types of control of maladministration in and Europe

Speech

Mr Chairman,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Firstly, Mr Chairman, I would like to express my gratitude for having been given the opportunity to present some ideas about the experiences of the in Europe and especially in the . I will of course be entitled to speak from my experience as of for 6 years and Ombudsman of the European Union for a little more than one year.

Because this occasion is arranged in the form of a panel and there are many distinguished speakers still to present their papers, I will only give you some ideas about the Ombudsman concept, which seems to be the most successful constitutional development in the world, especially during the last decades, in creating the modern democratic state.

According to figures released at the recent World Conference of the International Ombudsman Institute, in October 1996 in Buenos Aires, , an Ombudsman-type office exists in 84 countries under many different names: Parliamentary commissioner, defender, Mediator, Defender of the people's rights, or State controller, to mention just a few.

The different offices can have different mandates, they are nominated in different ways and operate differently, but in common, they have the obligation to overlook the activities of the public authorities and redress any maladministration which citizens might suffer from. To fulfil this task properly, they are usually guaranteed an independent position by the and are dealing with their cases based on complaints from citizens or on their own initiative. Most of the Ombudsmen are elected by the Parliament by a secret ballot for a term of 4 -6 years and cannot be dismissed during their term, unless they commit very serious crimes or are guilty of extremely grave misconduct in their duties.

The Ombudsman concept comes from Sweden. In its constitutional reform of 1809, Sweden decided to establish a high legal officer elected by the Parliament called the 'High Ombudsman' to supervise the legality of the activities of the Government and at large. The word 'Ombudsman' means that a person has a proxy to

1 represent somebody; in this case, the people or persons who complain about alleged wrongdoings of the public administration.

The Swedish Ombudsman, as well as the Finnish one established in the Finnish constitution of 1919, have a very broad mandate and strong powers. The mandate comprises not only the whole public administration, state and municipal, but also the supervision of the activities of the courts as far as the procedural and administrative sides of their work are concerned.

The Swedish and Finnish Ombudsmen, who are usually called the classic Ombudsmen, also have the power to prosecute or decide that a civil servant should be prosecuted before a court of law for criminal offences. This possibility is used only a few times each year, but it gives of course more strength to the remarks and opinions that the Ombudsman makes public. Access to a Parliamentary Ombudsman is free of charge. The Ombudsman can be addressed either by letter or orally; a complainant can even be assisted by a member of the staff to draft his complaint, when needed.

The next Ombudsman office was established in in 1953, with some significant changes from the Swedish model. The Danish model concentrated only on public administration, leaving out the judiciary from its mandate, and focusing especially on maladministration in public administrative activities.

It is therefore a weaker institution, the most effective power of which is the right to publicly recommend the undoing of administrative malpractices and to argue for better solutions. Its broad investigation powers and the right and obligation to report its findings in the annual report, or even in a special report, to the Parliament give the Members of Parliament the possibility to act on certain issues, for example by proposing law amendments.

It is very important to know the Danish model because this is the model which has been most widely followed in the world. First, to a great extent, in New Zealand in 1962, and then in many other Commonwealth countries. This is probably so because the weaker model was easier to accept for those who were in power, but on the other hand, it seems to be rather effective in countries with a notion for constitutional democracy and the rule of law.

New elements have successively been combined with this model; above all, the supervision of human rights, for example the European Convention on Human Rights, and in some countries, the fundamental rights and freedoms normally listed in the constitution.

Four other Ombudsman concepts in Europe have had an international impact:

- Firstly, the British Parliamentary Commissioner, for many English-speaking countries. In this system, the citizens have to get the consent of a Member of Parliament in order to successfully address the Commissioner, some sort of political filter, so to speak. - Secondly, the French Médiateur has had many followers in the French-speaking countries in Africa. This system has a political filter of the same type as the British system, but has also a

2 very interesting possibility to seek friendly solutions between the public administration and the citizens, even when the administration has acted legally but the decision is unfair or very difficult for the citizens to follow. - Thirdly, the Spanish Defensor del Pueblo system, whose mandate is very close to the classic Ombudsman concept, is complemented by many regional Ombudsmen elected by the regional Parliaments. Frankly speaking, to me the prevailing Spanish Ombudsman system seems, in many ways, to be the most adequate and comprehensive one in the world. - Fourthly, the right to petition the Parliament, which is most advanced in - and Luxembourg. This can also be combined with an Ombudsman, as is the case in Holland, Portugal and indeed in the European Union. This is effective for example in human rights' issues of great principalimportance, which need political experience and force to be solved. To me, it is not recommendable when an individual seeks the rights granted to him by law.

The idea of an Ombudsman for the European Union was suggested by the European Parliament as early as 1979. The right to apply to the European Ombudsman was finally included in the part of the establishing the citizenship of the Union. The institution was meant to deal with instances of maladministration and to represent an effective means of redress for European citizens who do not get proper administrative treatment by Community institutions or bodies. It was also believed that the new institution could improve the quality of administration and thereby enhance the relationship between the Community and European citizens.

When I started to work as European Ombudsman in September 1995, with the mandate to supervise maladministration in the activities of the Community institutions and bodies, I realised that I could not fully assist European citizens in gaining their rights under the European law without a close cooperation with the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament and with the national Ombudsmen and similar bodies of the Member States.

This is because we have received a lot of complaints concerning the application of Community law by national authorities and we have no mandate to deal with these cases, but the national Ombudsmen and similar bodies usually do. This cooperation has been agreed upon in a seminar recently held in Strasbourg attended by national Ombudsmen or similar bodies from all EU Member States and representatives of the European Parliament and Commission.

So far, we have established a network of liaison officers and agreed on an exchange of information and further gatherings to deepen knowledge of Community law.

This cooperation has been possible because most of the Member States have a national Ombudsman or a functioning Committee on Petitions. At present, only Italy, which has regional and municipal Ombudsmen, and Greece are lacking a national Ombudsman office. In Italy, law proposals have been put forward in the Parliament, so far without success. The present Government is preparing a law proposal on the subject.

With this background, I was very glad to receive information about the serious plans to

3 establish a National Parliamentary Ombudsman office in Greece. It would surely be of great help to me in my task to make Community law a living reality for European citizens all over the European Union.

The boom in the establishment of Ombudsman offices in the post-communist countries in Eastern Europe or in post-military government countries in Latin America is related to a will to demonstrate a commitment to constitutional democracy, the rule of law and a respect for citizens' fundamental and human rights.

This is what the Ombudsman represents and symbolizes in the world today.

For the Greece of today, no European can believe that there is an urgent need for Greece to set up an Ombudsman as a symbolic act. Still, the establishment of a national Parliamentary Ombudsman will be welcomed as a clear step forward for the democratic and human ideals that we share in Europe, and also for the promotion of European citizens' rights. Many of us Europeans always look upon Greece and Greek philosophy as the cradle of western culture, which has produced many of the basic democratic principles and ideas of our common heritage.

Thus we appreciate such a decision even more.

May I wish you good look with the project currently under discussion.

Thank you for the floor !

4