natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The complainant subsequently informed the Ombudsman that his complaint regarding the ‘EU Pillar’ was directed at the Commission.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
No observations were received from the complainant.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
THE COMPLAINT
JÄLKEEN m m
According to the complainant, these candidates are disadvantaged compared to those who live close to the place of competitions, which is normally Brussels.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
FURTHER INQUIRIES
JÄLKEEN
On 29 January 2003, the Ombudsman therefore wrote to the Commission.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
According to the complainant, the relevant facts were as follows:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The parallel drawn by the complainant with the case of the three fishery inspectors cannot be considered as being comparable.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
The complainant also refers to the Ombudsman’s decision in case 109/98/ME.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The Commission investigated the complaint in its role as guardian of the Treaty.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
The Lloyd’s case is very complicated and sensitive.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
Furthermore, the exchanges in 1977/78 between the Commission and the UK government concerning the transposition of Directive 73/239 are now 25 years old and can hardly be secret.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
The complainant’s case
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The most important of these are the judgements of UK courts in cases concerning Lloyd’s.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
Preliminary remark
JÄLKEEN
The complainant has the possibility to make a new complaint to the Ombudsman.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Ombudsman recalls, however, that the Court of Justice is the highest authority on Community law.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
The competition notice provided that candidates needed to have obtained the required university degree a er September 1997.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m
The Commission informed the complainant that access could not be granted since the Irish tax authorities had requested that the documents should not be disclosed.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
The complainant applied for the post available in Unit D/1, “Free Movement of Goods”.
JÄLKEEN m m
However, your details will be kept on fi le for one year”.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
JÄLKEEN m m m m
Furthermore, the Commission did not grant access to the documents related to the Commission’s decision not to fi ll the post of SNE.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
According to the Commission, the most probable explanation was that two of the le ers were presented for signature in the same fi le and the third (with registration number 240) in a separate one.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m ` m m
As regards the present case, the Commission accepted that its le er of 16 January 2002 was misleading for the complainant.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
3.3 In view of the above conclusions regarding the complainant’s allegations, the Ombudsman considers that the complainant has not provided any evidence to establish the damage which the misleading le er of 16 January 2002 had allegedly caused him.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
Such an evaluation sheet could be disclosed to candidates on request.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
On 7 December 1999, the President of the European Commission wrote to the European Ombudsman to inform him that:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The fourth indent concerns the protection of the ECB’s financial interests.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman considers, however, that the ECB’s interpretation of the complainant’s application was reasonable.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
JÄLKEEN m m
Decision on complaint 1117/2003/GG against the European Court of Auditors
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
In his complaint to the Ombudsman, the complainant made the following allegations:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
3.1.6 The European Convention
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Ombudsman first examined the admissibility of the complaint.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
Warning from one session to the next is insufficient.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
In summary, the complainant made the following points:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The President’s reply did not comment on this point.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman points out that the above finding relates only to the refusal of public access to agendas and minutes of the Praesidium.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m
On 24 March 2001, the Director-General of DG RTD sent an extensive information note to OLAF;
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The complainant’s observations
JÄLKEEN m m
The complainant’s observations on OLAF’s opinion contained, in summary, the following points:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
1.3 The Ombudsman points out that the present complaint is against OLAF.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
However, the Director General of DG RTD sent a le er to the Director General of OLAF, explaining that he would propose financing of the project to the Commission, absent advice to the contrary.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
According to Article 3 of the contract, the maximum contract value was to be 70.500 €.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
1.1 The European Agency for Reconstruction annexed fi ve documents to its opinion in this case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
Conclusion
JÄLKEEN
The first contract was originally concluded by the European Commission, but subsequently taken over by the Agency.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
CASESSETTLED BY THEINSTITUTION
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
In the same le er, Parliament informed the complainant of the outcome of the reevaluation of the off er, namely the non-selection due to the poor linguistic quality of the bid, i.e. a total of 15 spelling and grammar errors.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m
The alleged failure of explanation for the rejection of the bid for Greek
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
The complainant failed test 1.A.d) and was excluded from the competition.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The complainant’s request had therefore not been made in accordance with the relevant rules on the ma er.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
COGAM did not receive a reply to its le er.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complaint is against the Commission, DG Agriculture.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m
He thanked the Ombudsman for his assistance. The complainant also sent a copy of his le er dated 2 September 2003 to the head of unit AII.1 of Commission DG Agriculture, thanking him for the payment of € 5 008 and the interest due of € 659,83 and stating that the ma er is se led.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
Part of the final payment was owed to Stockholm University.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
He was therefore satisfied with the outcome of the case and thanked the Ombudsman for his assistance.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
According to the complainant, the relevant facts were as follows:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m ` m m m m m m
The complainant made no observations on the opinion of the Court of Auditors.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
3.2.4 The European Commission and the Court of Auditors
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Commission’s opinion
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
Those standards and procedures were followed in the present case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
Claim for an official Commission position on the audit and the procedures followed
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The Ombudsman therefore finds no maladministration regarding this aspect of the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The various activities to be financed by this grant were to take place in September and October 1998.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
With specific regard to the allegation made by the complainant, the Commission made the following comments:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
In a le er sent on 26 September 2002, the Ombudsman informed the Commission that the fi le of DG X appeared to be incomplete.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
This would appear to be a precise assurance.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
JÄLKEEN m m m m m
The Commission also stressed that the position it had maintained so far simply reflected its obligation to comply with the principle of sound financial management.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
In accordance with Article 3 (5) of the Statute53
JÄLKEEN m m m
, he therefore wrote to the President of the
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The complainant is the Brussels correspondent of the “Stern”, a German weekly.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
There was no database which provided a comprehensive list of contracts.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
In its second opinion, the Commission made the following comments:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
The Commission used the reference to investigations by OLAF in an arbitrary manner.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore asked the Commission to comment on the complainant’s view that some questions had still not been answered.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
On 3 July 2002, the following email reply was sent in the name of Parliament’s Translation Planning
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
In its opinion, the European Parliament made the following comments:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complainant finally noted that it wished to be informed about the nature of the “technical” problem that had occurred and the relevant opinion of the Legal Service.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
The complainant added that there was definitely a communication and transparency problem masked by bureaucracy and “formalities”.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
2.5 In these circumstances, the Ombudsman considers that by sending and failing to correct the email message of 3 July 2002, Parliament failed to comply with the obligation to be courteous in relations with the public.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING giving only partial access.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
As an example, the complainant mentions that all the working party reports in this case bear only the title of the Commission’s proposal.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
By the time a proposal gets to the Council, the Commission has already put the proposal in the public domain and the Council acts as a legislator.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman then stated the results of his inspection, as follows:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The same analysis also applies to the deletions in Document 5158/01, which contains an earlier proposal for the text of a Regulation.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
The Ombudsman informed the Council of his detailed findings and requested it to re-examine its position.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The Ombudsman forwarded the complainant’s suggestions to the Council, for information.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
On the basis of this evidence, the facts of the case appear to be as follows:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
His actions in this regard have constituted a serious misconduct.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Commission’s opinion
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
By lodging a complaint with the Ombudsman, the complainant believed that he had chosen the right procedure.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
The Commission considered that its services complied with the rules and principles governing the tender procedure.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m
– Cost for legal advice and substantial time for replying to the Commission’s statements.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Ombudsman therefore considered that the complainant’s claim to be informed had been met.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
FUNCTIONING OF THE IST PROGRAMME
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman invited the Commission to comment on this statement.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complainant was invited to submit observations on the Commission’s opinion.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The Ombudsman therefore makes a critical remark below.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
In the summer of 2002, the Commission published two open competitions, one for administrators (COM/A/1/02) and one for assistant administrators (COM/A/2/02), in the fields of agriculture,
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m
The appointing authority, in the interest of the service and having regard to the posts covered by the competition in question, had therefore legally and legitimately been able to impose the condition concerned.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m
To this end, they had considerable discretion, provided they observed the general provisions of the Staff Regulations.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
According to the
JÄLKEEN m m m m m m m
ANINQUIRY fi ve years before the closing date for the submission of applications (rather than three years as
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
This is an instance of maladministration.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complainant was the responsible scientist on this research contract.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
For the first time, the complainant also provided copies of the dra final report and the final report themselves.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
On 1 April 1998, the Board submi ed the final cost statement to the Commission.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The complainant’s observations
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
He would therefore be unable to deal with any complaints against Irish authorities.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
3.4 In the present case, the Commission examined and accepted the dra final report in April 1997.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
According to the complainant, the relevant facts are, in summary, the following:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
No certified information on staff or on subcontractors was required.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complainant’s observations made, in summary, the following points:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
2.2 The Commission argues that no action was undertaken because the answers to the complainant’s questions could all be found in the tender specifications, with additional details provided on the FAQ website.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
Decision on complaint 852/2003/OV against the Economic and Social Commi ee
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
In summary, the complainant alleges that ECOSOC’s statement that he provided false information is unfounded and constitutes an act of maladministration.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
These additional allegations are as unfounded and as unsubstantiated as the allegation that is the subject of the present complaint.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
JÄLKEEN m m m m m m m
ECOSOC has in no way sought to discredit the complainant.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m
Enquiries as to whether this had in fact occurred were still ongoing.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The complaint was made by a chartered accountant.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
Decisions on complaints 2097/2002/GG and 2059/2002/IP against the Council of the European Union
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The Council rejected this request.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
Second, the candidate’s confidence in the administration is strengthened.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
A copy of the complainant’s examination paper as well as its evaluation by the Selection Board would be sent to the complainant the same day.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
As regards the present case, the Council had decided to allow the complainant access to his own examination paper.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
• there is a review of the distribution of resources between schools;
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
In response to the complainants’ requests, the Commission made the following points:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
• the ma er is fully investigated at the highest level;
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman considers that the Commission’s responsibility does not extend to questions concerning the internal management of the Schools.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore makes the following dra recommendation to the Commission, in accordance with Article 3 (6) of the Statute of the Ombudsman:
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m
1.4 The Ombudsman notes the complainant’s general concerns about the governance and accountability of the European Schools.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m
On 25 November 1998, the complainant submi ed a formal complaint to the Commission’s representation in Sweden.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The complainant’s observations
JÄLKEEN m m m m
He agreed that this might be more difficult than pursuing debtors in Sweden itself.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
A foreign national who lived and worked in Sweden possessed a “personnummer”.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
THE DRAFT RECOMMENDATION
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m
According to the Commission, the complainant was finally informed by a le er sent on 8 August 2002.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
On 17 January 2002, the Council replied to the complainant’s application.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
The Council repeated that the lists of commi ees and working groups requested by the complainant do not exist.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
No observations were received.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN
The Council therefore abstained from commenting on the substance of the dra recommendation.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore finds no maladministration as regards this aspect of the complaint.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
The implementing measures provided for in Article 139 shall include appropriate provisions to that end.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
(The Commission enclosed a copy of the Communication with its opinion).
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m
As soon as possible a er the award decision and within the following week at the latest, the contracting authority notifies all unsuccessful tenderers or candidates simultaneously, by mail and fax or email, that their bid or application has not been accepted.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m
2.5 The Ombudsman considers that the legal basis for the new procedure falls outside the scope of his inquiry.
PÄÄTÖKSETTUTKIMUKSEN m m m m m m m m
DECISIONSFOLLOWING
MUIHINTOIMIELIMIIN
The complainant’s observations
SUHTEETEUROOPANUNIONIN m
ANNUAL REPORT 2003
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m ` m
Decision on query Q1/2003/IP
Bryssel, Belgia, 24. maaliskuuta 2003.
Executive summary mary
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003
RELATIONSWITH
MUIHINTOIMIELIMIIN m
OTHERINSTITUTIONS of the European Union of t
SUHTEETEUROOPANUNIONIN m m m m m m m m m ` m m
OTHERINSTITUTIONS
SUHTEETEUROOPANUNIONIN m
OTHERINSTITUTIONS
MUIHINTOIMIELIMIIN
Subsequently, the Commi ee adopted the Earl of STOCKTON’s Report unanimously.
SUHTEETEUROOPANUNIONIN m m m m m m m m
Ombudsman’s owninitiative inquiries.
©Euroopanparlamentti
Mr DIAMANDOUROS outlined his priorities for the work of the European Ombudsman: the maintenance and enhancement of the capacity of the Ombudsman’s Offi ce to help citizens, the promotion of the rule of law, good administration and respect for human rights, and the reaching out to all citizens to inform them of how to use their rights.
Nikiforos Diamandouros ja Euroopan yhteisöjen virallisten julkaisujen toimiston pääjohtaja Thomas Cran eld allekirjoittavat palvelutasopuitesopimuksen.
Mr DIAMANDOUROS also highlighted a number of issues of specific concern to infringement procedures, friendly solutions and EU administrative law.
Strasbourg, Ranska, 22. lokakuuta 2003.
Executive summary
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003
2 Complaints to the Ombudsman
©Kreikanoikeusasiamies
ANDSIMILARBODIES
OIKEUSASIAMIEHIIN
6 Public relations
Ateena, Kreikka, 7. huhtikuuta 2003.
Relations with Ombudsmenand similar bodies
©Valencianoikeusasiamies
ANDSIMILARBODIES
JAVASTAAVIINELIMIIN
Participants at the 4th Seminar of the National Ombudsmen and Similar Bodies of the EU.Athens, Greece, 7 April 2003.
EU:n alueellisten oikeusasiamiesten ja vastaavien elinten neljännen tapaamisen osallistujia.Valencia, Espanja, 10. huhtikuuta 2003.
MEETING OF REGIONAL OMBUDSMEN OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, VALENCIA, SPAIN
OIKEUSASIAMIEHIIN m
On 2 September, Mr DIAMANDOUROS a ended a meeting of the network of Ombudsmen of the “Grande Région” (transborder cooperation between certain neighbouring French, German and Belgian regions and Luxembourg), at the invitation of Mr Bernard STASI, French Ombudsman.
Saksan vetoomusvaliokuntien puheenjohtajien ja varapuheenjohtajien sekä Saksan ja saksankielisten maiden oikeusasiamiesten tapaamisen osallistujia.
Mr DIAMANDOUROS and Mrs O’REILLY discussed several issues such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights, disability rights, redress and compensation, and the liaison network.
Kiel, Saksa, 15. syyskuuta 2003.
This year the meeting took place in the Landtag of Schleswig-Holstein in Kiel.
OIKEUSASIAMIEHENSUHTEET m
ANDSIMILARBODIES
OIKEUSASIAMIEHIIN m
In November 2001, a new section of the Summit entitled Ombudsman Daily News was created.
Neljännen yhteyshenkilöiden kokouksen osallistujia.
In 2003, Ombudsman Daily News was published every working day, offering more than 1,000 news stories to readers.
Strasbourg, Ranska, 1.joulukuuta 2003
During the meeting, there were a number of opportunities for liaison officers to discuss their work bilaterally. The excursion organised by the European Ombudsman and the various dinners and lunches offered ample time for the officers to discuss their work more informally with each other.
Alankomaiden oikeusasiamies Roel Fernhout, Liettuan parlamentin oikeusasiamies Zita Zamžickiene, Azerbaidzanin ihmisoikeusvaltuutettu, professori Elmira Suleymanova, Liettuan parlamentin oikeusasiamies Rimante Šalaševiciute ja Nikiforos Diamandouros konferenssissa, jonka teemana oli ”Ombudsman and the Law of the European Union”.
RELATIONS WITH NATIONAL OMBUDSMENIN THEACCESSIONSTATES
Varsova, Puola, 30. toukokuuta 2003.
2 Complaints to the Ombudsman
VUOSIKERTOMUS 2003 m
3 Decisions following an inquiry
©Euroopanparlamentti
4 Relations with other institutionsof the European Union
Juuri valittu uusi oikeusasiamies Nikiforos Diamandouros.
PUBLICRELATIONS
TIEDOTUSTOIMINTA m m
On 15 January, the European Parliament elected Professor P. Nikiforos DIAMANDOUROS as European Ombudsman a er Jacob SÖDERMAN, who had held the offi ce since 1995, decided to retire.
Nikiforos Diamandouros Euroopan yhteisöjen tuomioistuimessa.
Mr Diamandouros on the day of his election. Strasbourg, France, 15 January 2003.
Luxemburg, 1. huhtikuuta 2003.