natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Any eventual restriction of the access to information by the Ombudsman should be based on strict legal criteria and not on such an open clause that leaves to the administration itself the definition of the cases in which it considers that secrecy should apply.
Any eventual restriction of the access to information by the Ombudsman should be based on strict legal criteria and not on such an open clause that leaves to the administration itself the definition of the cases in which it considers that secrecy should apply.
On the other hand, one does not see what kind of " duly substantiated grounds " can justify the " secrecy " of the information detained by the administration in the confronts of the Ombudsman, as this one, as well as his staff, is also bounded by the same duty of secrecy as the institutions.
On the other hand, one does not see what kind of " duly substantiated grounds " can justify the " secrecy " of the information detained by the administration in the confronts of the Ombudsman, as this one, as well as his staff, is also bounded by the same duty of secrecy as the institutions.
Not to mention that any contribution of the Ombudsman to improve good administration is also in the interest of the institutions.
Not to mention that any contribution of the Ombudsman to improve good administration is also in the interest of the institutions.
At this light, the restriction foreseen in the last sentence of paragraph 2 seems undesirable and somehow constitutes a sign of an unjustified distrust in the Ombudsman.
At this light, the restriction foreseen in the last sentence of paragraph 2 seems undesirable and somehow constitutes a sign of an unjustified distrust in the Ombudsman.
It appears thus convenient to delete the sentence in question.
It appears thus convenient to delete the sentence in question.
However, this does not imply that the Ombudsman should have an unconditional access to all information or documents.
However, this does not imply that the Ombudsman should have an unconditional access to all information or documents.
It is advisable to introduce objective rules establishing the duties of the Ombudsman in what concerns access to classified information or documents, maxime to sensitive documents within the meaning of article 9 of the Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.
It is advisable to introduce objective rules establishing the duties of the Ombudsman in what concerns access to classified information or documents, maxime to sensitive documents within the meaning of article 9 of the Regulation (EC) 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents.
This can easily be done by establishing a duty for the Ombudsman to respect rules strictly similar to those in force in the institutions or bodies that supply those documents.
This can easily be done by establishing a duty for the Ombudsman to respect rules strictly similar to those in force in the institutions or bodies that supply those documents.
This is perfectly on line with the internal rules existing in different institutions in what concerns the access to classified information, notably the rules in force in the Commission concerning internal rules of security (Commission Decision of 29 November 2001 amending its internal Rules of Procedure).
This is perfectly on line with the internal rules existing in different institutions in what concerns the access to classified information, notably the rules in force in the Commission concerning internal rules of security (Commission Decision of 29 November 2001 amending its internal Rules of Procedure).
In parallel it is convenient to stress that the institutions supplying classified information or documents to the Ombudsman must inform the Ombudsman of this classification.
In parallel it is convenient to stress that the institutions supplying classified information or documents to the Ombudsman must inform the Ombudsman of this classification.
Finally, it is also useful to invite the Ombudsman and the institutions to agree on concrete operational rules for the supply of such documents, as the best way to avoid disputes in the future.
Finally, it is also useful to invite the Ombudsman and the institutions to agree on concrete operational rules for the supply of such documents, as the best way to avoid disputes in the future.
A similar modification will also have to be introduced in the preamble of the Statute of the Ombudsman.
A similar modification will also have to be introduced in the preamble of the Statute of the Ombudsman.
In addition, it would be convenient to reinforce the provisions that spell out that both the Ombudsman and his staff are themselves bounded by the duty of non disclosure of the information they accede to in the course of their inquiries, in order to specify that they shall not divulge any classified document or information and to stress that this duty is particularly strong in what concerns "sensitive" documents within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
In addition, it would be convenient to reinforce the provisions that spell out that both the Ombudsman and his staff are themselves bounded by the duty of non disclosure of the information they accede to in the course of their inquiries, in order to specify that they shall not divulge any classified document or information and to stress that this duty is particularly strong in what concerns "sensitive" documents within the meaning of Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p.
Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p.
43. and documents having an impact in terms of personal data protection, as well as to stress that the access by the public to the documents obtained by the Ombudsman in the course of his inquiries must be submitted to the conditions and limits set out in the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 mentioned.
43. and documents having an impact in terms of personal data protection, as well as to stress that the access by the public to the documents obtained by the Ombudsman in the course of his inquiries must be submitted to the conditions and limits set out in the Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 mentioned.
It should be noted that the Parliament has already dealt with this question in 2001, in the framework of the aforementioned resolution of the 6 September.
It should be noted that the Parliament has already dealt with this question in 2001, in the framework of the aforementioned resolution of the 6 September.
At the time, Parliament adopted a similar modification of paragraph 2, together with other modifications suggested by the then Ombudsman, Mr Söderman, which were not retaken by Mr Diamandouros.
At the time, Parliament adopted a similar modification of paragraph 2, together with other modifications suggested by the then Ombudsman, Mr Söderman, which were not retaken by Mr Diamandouros.
These concerned notably documents originating from Member States.
These concerned notably documents originating from Member States.
As Mr Diamandouros stressed before the Constitutional Affairs Committee that he sees no need to modify these rules, which constitute a rather sensible matter for Member States, there seems to be no need for the Parliament to revive those modifications.
As Mr Diamandouros stressed before the Constitutional Affairs Committee that he sees no need to modify these rules, which constitute a rather sensible matter for Member States, there seems to be no need for the Parliament to revive those modifications.
The testimonial of officials
The testimonial of officials
Article 3, paragraph 2, last sub-paragraph of the Statute of the Ombudsman stipulates that:
Article 3, paragraph 2, last sub-paragraph of the Statute of the Ombudsman stipulates that:
" Officials and other servants of Community institutions and bodies must testify at the request of the Ombudsman; they shall speak on behalf of and in accordance with instructions from their administrations and shall continue to be bound by their duty of professional secrecy ".
" Officials and other servants of Community institutions and bodies must testify at the request of the Ombudsman; they shall speak on behalf of and in accordance with instructions from their administrations and shall continue to be bound by their duty of professional secrecy ".
The Ombudsman considers in his letter that the last sentence of this article contains " obscure " conditions which may be interpreted by public opinion as meaning that " witness might not always be required to tell the truth ".
The Ombudsman considers in his letter that the last sentence of this article contains " obscure " conditions which may be interpreted by public opinion as meaning that " witness might not always be required to tell the truth ".
This may also hinder the thrust of citizens in the capacity of the Ombudsman to conduct thorough inquiries.
This may also hinder the thrust of citizens in the capacity of the Ombudsman to conduct thorough inquiries.
Thus, Mr Diamandouros proposes that it be deleted.
Thus, Mr Diamandouros proposes that it be deleted.
It is in fact difficult to explain to public opinion why officials should testify before the Ombudsman " on behalf and in accordance with the instructions from their administrations " and not on the basis of the knowledge they have of the facts upon which the Ombudsman is inquiring.
It is in fact difficult to explain to public opinion why officials should testify before the Ombudsman " on behalf and in accordance with the instructions from their administrations " and not on the basis of the knowledge they have of the facts upon which the Ombudsman is inquiring.
This could even be interpreted as implying that they may be entitled to lye to the Ombudsman if they are instructed to do so.
This could even be interpreted as implying that they may be entitled to lye to the Ombudsman if they are instructed to do so.
This is clearly not the kind of standards that correspond to the demands of a modern and open administration and would not meet the requirements of the concept of good administration, recognized as a fundamental right of European citizens (article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).
This is clearly not the kind of standards that correspond to the demands of a modern and open administration and would not meet the requirements of the concept of good administration, recognized as a fundamental right of European citizens (article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union).
Consequently, this sentence clearly should be deleted.
Consequently, this sentence clearly should be deleted.
Information concerning possible criminal or illegal activity
Information concerning possible criminal or illegal activity
Mr Diamandouros proposes also to modify article 4 of the Statute of the Ombudsman in order to confer to the Ombudsman certain discretion in the choice of the authorities he shall inform when in the course of the inquiries he conducts he learns of facts that he considers might be related to criminal activities.
Mr Diamandouros proposes also to modify article 4 of the Statute of the Ombudsman in order to confer to the Ombudsman certain discretion in the choice of the authorities he shall inform when in the course of the inquiries he conducts he learns of facts that he considers might be related to criminal activities.
Instead of only alerting the national competent authorities, as the present drafting of article 4 foresees, he proposes to allow the Ombudsman to have the choice between alerting the national authorities or the Union's competent institutions and bodies, such as for instance OLAF or the future European Public Prosecutor, or any other organism with competencies in this field that could be created in the future.
Instead of only alerting the national competent authorities, as the present drafting of article 4 foresees, he proposes to allow the Ombudsman to have the choice between alerting the national authorities or the Union's competent institutions and bodies, such as for instance OLAF or the future European Public Prosecutor, or any other organism with competencies in this field that could be created in the future.
It should be recognized that in some cases it may be in fact more advisable to alert in first hand the Europeans authorities or bodies.
It should be recognized that in some cases it may be in fact more advisable to alert in first hand the Europeans authorities or bodies.
It could be the case when doubtful activities concerning fraud against the financial interests of the EU or corruption spotted by the Ombudsman can be dealt more appropriately through the disciplinary competencies of the European institutions or can be better investigated by OLAF or by the future European Public Prosecutor than by the national authorities of a single Member State.
It could be the case when doubtful activities concerning fraud against the financial interests of the EU or corruption spotted by the Ombudsman can be dealt more appropriately through the disciplinary competencies of the European institutions or can be better investigated by OLAF or by the future European Public Prosecutor than by the national authorities of a single Member State.
Moreover, we should remember that, according to article 22a of the Staff Regulations, all civil servants of the European institutions, including the staff of the Ombudsman, are bound by the duty to inform their superiors or the OLAF of any possible illegal activity, including fraud or corruption detrimental to the interests of the Union.
Moreover, we should remember that, according to article 22a of the Staff Regulations, all civil servants of the European institutions, including the staff of the Ombudsman, are bound by the duty to inform their superiors or the OLAF of any possible illegal activity, including fraud or corruption detrimental to the interests of the Union.
Cooperation with other international institutions
Cooperation with other international institutions
Mr Diamandouros also demands the modification of article 5 of the Statute of the Ombudsman
Mr Diamandouros also demands the modification of article 5 of the Statute of the Ombudsman
" Insofar as it may help to make his enquiries more efficient and better safeguard the rights and interests of persons who make complaints to him, the Ombudsman may cooperate with authorities of the same type in certain Member States provided he complies with the national law applicable.
" Insofar as it may help to make his enquiries more efficient and better safeguard the rights and interests of persons who make complaints to him, the Ombudsman may cooperate with authorities of the same type in certain Member States provided he complies with the national law applicable.
The Ombudsman may not by this means demand to see documents to which he would not have access under Article 3. " in order to allow the Ombudsman to cooperate with other institutions for the promotion and protection of Fundamental Rights.
The Ombudsman may not by this means demand to see documents to which he would not have access under Article 3. " in order to allow the Ombudsman to cooperate with other institutions for the promotion and protection of Fundamental Rights.
To this purpose, one must remember that although a minority of national Ombudsman of Member States have some specific competencies in what concerns the protection of Fundamental Rights of citizens (including the right of appealing to Court), this is not the case of the majority of them and it is not the case of the European Ombudsman.
To this purpose, one must remember that although a minority of national Ombudsman of Member States have some specific competencies in what concerns the protection of Fundamental Rights of citizens (including the right of appealing to Court), this is not the case of the majority of them and it is not the case of the European Ombudsman.
However, it is not deniable that, as a simple cooperation, with no specific new competencies associated to it that could eventually conflict with the competencies of other institutions or bodies of Union, contacts and exchange of experiences between the Ombudsman and such international structures may be enriching for both parts and help improving the performance of the European Ombudsman in what concerns the promotion of " good administration ", recognized as a fundamental right of European citizens by the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
However, it is not deniable that, as a simple cooperation, with no specific new competencies associated to it that could eventually conflict with the competencies of other institutions or bodies of Union, contacts and exchange of experiences between the Ombudsman and such international structures may be enriching for both parts and help improving the performance of the European Ombudsman in what concerns the promotion of " good administration ", recognized as a fundamental right of European citizens by the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
In this measure, the suggestion of Mr Diamandouros seems acceptable.
In this measure, the suggestion of Mr Diamandouros seems acceptable.
Mr Diamandouros also suggests that the references to the provisions of the Treaty on the European Coal and Steel Community be deleted, as this treaty expired in 2002.
Mr Diamandouros also suggests that the references to the provisions of the Treaty on the European Coal and Steel Community be deleted, as this treaty expired in 2002.
This explains amendments 1, 3 and 6 (first part).
This explains amendments 1, 3 and 6 (first part).
СТАНОВИЩЕ на комисията по петиции
OPINION of the Committee on Petitions
относно предложение за Решение на Европейския парламент за изменение на неговото Решение 94/262/ЕОВС, ЕО, Евратом от 9 март 1994 г. относно правилата и общите условия за изпълнението на функциите на омбудсмана
on a proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament amending its Decision 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman's duties
In order to ensure that it is able to function democratically, the European Union has always needed the legitimisation of its citizens – and this is all the more the case as it expands.
In order to ensure that it is able to function democratically, the European Union has always needed the legitimisation of its citizens – and this is all the more the case as it expands.
Such legitimisation directly depends on a number of factors, including confidence in a secure and evolving system of values which uphold the fundamental rights of European citizens.
Such legitimisation directly depends on a number of factors, including confidence in a secure and evolving system of values which uphold the fundamental rights of European citizens.
A historic milestone has been reached in the process of European integration insofar as the need for communication between the Union and European citizens has become clearer than ever.
A historic milestone has been reached in the process of European integration insofar as the need for communication between the Union and European citizens has become clearer than ever.
First and foremost, this means that the European Union is required to take on board the concerns of its citizens and succeed in reassuring them that its institutions are constantly endeavouring to meet their expectations.
First and foremost, this means that the European Union is required to take on board the concerns of its citizens and succeed in reassuring them that its institutions are constantly endeavouring to meet their expectations.
In order to be credible, such endeavours must keep step with historic developments and the fresh requirements which must be met as a result to ensure the harmonious functioning of the Union .
In order to be credible, such endeavours must keep step with historic developments and the fresh requirements which must be met as a result to ensure the harmonious functioning of the Union.
The institutional structure of the European Union is fashioned so as to reflect and conform to the dual basic principle of 'Union of States and Union of Peoples'.
The institutional structure of the European Union is fashioned so as to reflect and conform to the dual basic principle of 'Union of States and Union of Peoples'.
The institutions of the Union represent both the States and the people.
The institutions of the Union represent both the States and the people.
The European Parliament is only one of the institutions representing the people.
The European Parliament is only one of the institutions representing the people.
The primary objective of the European Ombudsman, as an institution governed by the rule of law, is to ensure correct conduct by the institutions and bodies of the European Union in their dealings with members of the public, showing due respect for them and thereby strengthening their confidence in these institutions and bodies and in the European edifice as a whole, wherever possible.
The primary objective of the European Ombudsman, as an institution governed by the rule of law, is to ensure correct conduct by the institutions and bodies of the European Union in their dealings with members of the public, showing due respect for them and thereby strengthening their confidence in these institutions and bodies and in the European edifice as a whole, wherever possible.
The proposals relating to the review of the decision of the European Parliament 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman's duties as incorporated into Annex X to the Rules of Procedure of Parliament
The proposals relating to the review of the decision of the European Parliament 94/262/ECSC, EC, Euratom of 9 March 1994 on the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman's duties as incorporated into Annex X to the Rules of Procedure of Parliament
1 OJ L 113, 4.5.1994, p.
1 OJ L 113, 4.5.1994, p.
Decision amended by the Decision of the European Parliament of 14 March 2002, 2002/262/EC, ECSC, Euratom (OJ L 92, 9.4.2002, p.
Decision amended by the Decision of the European Parliament of 14 March 2002, 2002/262/EC, ECSC, Euratom (OJ L 92, 9.4.2002, p.
1 acquire particular significance in the light of the above observations.
1 acquire particular significance in the light of the above observations.
Insofar as these modifications effectively equip the Ombudsman to function as required by European Union primary legislation, it is important that they be adopted.
Insofar as these modifications effectively equip the Ombudsman to function as required by European Union primary legislation, it is important that they be adopted.
Комисията по петиции приканва водещата комисия по конституционни въпроси да включи в предложението за резолюция, което ще приеме, следните предложения:
The Committee on Petitions calls on the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
Встъпване във висящи съдебни дела
Intervention in cases before courts
В противен случай това би било равносилно на поставяне под въпрос на разумността на решението на Съда;
Were this not so, it would be tantamount to questioning the soundness of the ECJ's judgment;
Достъпът до всички документи, без изключение, които са притежание на институциите на Общността, дава възможност да се гарантира, че омбудсманът е възможно най-добре информиран и следователно в позиция да прави по-уместни препоръки, като по този начин защитава по-ефективно отделните граждани.
Access to all documents, without exception, in the possession of the Community institutions makes it possible to ensure that the Ombudsman is as fully informed as possible and hence in a position to make more appropriate recommendations, thereby protecting individual citizens more effectively.