Across the world, the sirens of the climate crisis have shifted from distant warnings to devastating realities. We are not only driving our planet to its breaking point, but are also witnessing serious impacts on human rights. We see the evidence every day: lives are lost, health is at risk, and people are forcibly displaced as homes are levelled and livelihoods erased.

The heaviest price is being paid by the most vulnerable. The impacts of climate change undermine our social fabric, fuel insecurity and political instability, and drain national economies. Most notably, they affect those who are often least responsible for the warming of our planet, exacerbating existing inequalities.

Yet, environmental protections and commitments are being rolled back in too many places, often in pursuit of political and economic gains. Short-termism, climate denial, and attacks on science continue to undermine global climate action. Those who speak up to protect our planet too often face repression when they should be supported.

International and regional courts, including the European Court of Human Rights in its landmark 2024 KlimaSeniorinnen judgment, and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its historic 2025 Advisory Opinion, have provided guidance on how state obligations under international human rights law and beyond are actionable in the context of climate change. The law is clear: states have a duty to limit and address the adverse human rights impacts of climate change. Failure to take appropriate action is a breach of duty that carries a range of legal consequences.

Fulfilling these responsibilities requires limiting global warming to 1.5°C by taking effective steps to cut emissions, including those caused by private actors. It also requires building resilience through adaptation measures that address specific protection needs, and safeguarding the rights of all people to access justice, information, and effective participation.

Respect for the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities of states remains key. By ensuring a just transition from fossil fuels to clean energy and aligning investments with rights-based strategies, we can support equitable and sustainable climate action and protect vulnerable communities. Because no state can navigate this devastating storm alone, international cooperation is the only vessel that will hold.

This is why I am following with close attention the current negotiations in New York on a draft resolution to the UN General Assembly, introduced by the leadership of the Republic of Vanuatu and the Core Group of States. This initiative aims to translate the 2025 ICJ Advisory Opinion into concrete, multilateral action. The world’s most affected people are demanding a bridge between legal blueprints and meaningful climate action – one that operationalises state responsibility, increases transparency, and addresses climate-related loss and damage, as well as reparations. These efforts should be strengthened and supported – not diluted by compromise.

At the end of April, three years after the General Assembly first requested the ICJ’s guidance, UN member states will cast their votes. I recognise that today our eyes are understandably fixed on the devastating reality of wars across our globe and the immediate need for peace. Yet we cannot afford to treat the climate crisis as a secondary concern. It remains one of the greatest existential threats to humanity and our planet, acting as a multiplier of global instability and human suffering.

I urge Council of Europe member states to lead by example by sponsoring and securing the adoption of this resolution. We have the science and the legal framework; now we need the political will to translate them into action. The future of humanity depends on whether we act to build a world in which peace, human rights, democracy, the rule of law, and climate protection are treated as the single, inseparable mission they are.

- Michael O'Flaherty

Reclama retirar las advertencias restrictivas que penalizan la experiencia del personal temporal

No existe ninguna base normativa que permita excluir su participación en ofertas temporales
 

La síndica de greuges de Cataluña, Esther Giménez-Salinas, ha emitido una resolución en la que pide a la Generalitat de Cataluña que deje sin efecto los criterios establecidos en las ofertas publicadas en el ATRI que impiden a los funcionarios interinos que han finalizado su relación de interinidad por haber superado el plazo máximo de tres años desde su nombramiento presentarse a otro proceso de provisión temporal.

Varios funcionarios interinos que se encuentran en esta situación se dirigieron a la institución para denunciar, por una parte, que no se había convocado la plaza que ocupaban, a pesar de tener un carácter estructural; y, por otra parte, que se les impedía presentarse a nuevas ofertas de provisión temporal en la misma unidad o departamento donde habían prestado o estaban prestando servicios.

La Dirección General de Función Pública (DGFP) justifica estos criterios limitativos con la necesidad de prevenir el abuso de temporalidad, y afirma que se enmarcan en el Texto refundido de la Ley del Estatuto básico del empleado público (TREBEP).

No obstante, la síndica considera que no existe ninguna base normativa vigente que permita excluir a estas personas de la participación en ofertas temporales, aunque haya coincidencia funcional u orgánica con el puesto que ocupaban anteriormente. Por tanto, entiende que las instrucciones internas de la DGFP no pueden traducirse en un veto generalizado al acceso al empleo temporal de las personas que se han quedado sin plaza por haber superado el plazo legal de tres años.

La resolución del Síndic de Greuges recuerda que la normativa actual, reforzada por la Ley 20/2021, de 28 de diciembre, de medidas urgentes para la reducción de la temporalidad en el empleo público, establece medidas de protección para el personal temporal y que convertir la experiencia profesional en un factor de penalización es contrario al ordenamiento jurídico. En este sentido, alerta de que estas prácticas pueden vulnerar el derecho fundamental a participar en condiciones de igualdad en los procesos de acceso al empleo público, de acuerdo con los principios de igualdad, mérito y capacidad.

La institución también basa su análisis en la doctrina del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, que ha señalado en repetidas ocasiones que el abuso de la temporalidad se produce cuando la Administración incumple su obligación de convocar procesos selectivos para cubrir de manera definitiva las plazas vacantes.

La institución concluye que la lucha contra el abuso de la temporalidad no puede hacerse a expensas de los derechos de los trabajadores públicos ni mediante medidas restrictivas que no tengan cobertura legal.

During his official visit to Brussels, the Ombudsman, Endrit Shabani, in an interview with Euronews Albania, shared details about his reporting to EU institutions. The focus of the discussions was on critical human rights challenges in Albania: the property issue, the delay in court proceedings and the high number of detainees, with a particular emphasis on persons with disabilities and those with mental health problems.

Regarding the right to assembly and police actions, the Ombudsman stated:

"There is no protest that is not monitored by the institution. The protocols for the use of tear gas and force in assemblies are being investigated, and we have asked the police for clear protocols on who gives the order to use it."

He also informed that the Ombudsman's teams have immediately gone to the field to handle the property complaints of residents in Durrës and Rrjoll, issues that remain under active investigation.

In conclusion, the three essential objectives of his constitutional mandate were reiterated:

1. Shortening the response time to citizens.

2. Increasing the enforceability of the Ombudsman's recommendations.

3. Consolidating public trust in the institution.

Watch the full interview with journalist Ilir Kazaferi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGFTeJFWKAI

Le Médiateur de la Wallonie et de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, Nicolas Lagasse, a récemment rencontré Annie Devos, Secrétaire générale a.i. de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, également Administratrice générale des Maisons de Justice.

Les missions du Médiateur au service de la bonne administration

Le Médiateur a rappelé les trois dimensions de sa mission : recevoir les réclamations des usagers, être canal externe pour les lanceurs d'alerte, et formuler des recommandations pour améliorer le fonctionnement des administrations. Il a souligné son rôle de soutien à la bonne action administrative et l'importance du dialogue constant avec les administrations pour rapprocher l'administration du citoyen.

Une vision partagée : le citoyen au centre

En sa qualité d'Administratrice générale des Maisons de Justice, Annie Devos a évoqué la médiation pénale, qui favorise l'écoute et le dialogue. Cette approche rejoint celle du Médiateur, qui pratique également la médiation en présentiel dans les matières de l'environnement et de l'urbanisme.

Les deux interlocuteurs partagent une vision commune : placer le citoyen au centre et faire vivre la démocratie et l'État de droit par un véritable maillage institutionnel.

Transformation numérique et vigilance

La Secrétaire générale a présenté la trajectoire de transformation en cours, notamment avec l'accès à "Mon Espace" sur le site web. Le Médiateur a salué cette initiative tout en rappelant la vigilance nécessaire face à la fracture numérique, citant un récent arrêt de la Cour constitutionnelle (BXL) et l’importance de l’accessibilité des services publics (pas juste internet) et pas le tout au numérique. Annie Devos a partagé cette préoccupation et sa volonté d'améliorer les services tout en garantissant leur accessibilité à tous.

Des outils pour structurer le dialogue

Le Médiateur a rappelé l’importance de mettre en place et faire évoluer les protocoles de collaboration et un suivi régulier de ses recommandations dans le cadre d’un dialogue régulier avec les administrations. La Secrétaire générale a exprimé sa volonté d'examiner cette proposition avec ses administrateurs généraux.

Le droit à l'erreur : fil rouge 2025

Nicolas Lagasse a présenté le fil rouge de son rapport annuel 2025, qui portera sur le droit à l'erreur, en lien avec la Déclaration de politique régionale et communautaire. La Secrétaire générale s'est engagée à répercuter ce point au sein du ministère.

Cette rencontre témoigne d'une volonté commune de transformer la culture des services publics pour garantir une administration accessible, transparente et à l'écoute.