Sarà una riflessione ampia e articolata sul rapporto tra cittadini, istituzioni e innovazione tecnologica quella in programma mercoledì 15 aprile 2026 alle ore 10.30 presso la Sala Mechelli del Consiglio regionale del Lazio.

L’iniziativa, promossa dal Difensore civico della Regione Lazio, si inserisce nel solco delle attività istituzionali volte a rafforzare la tutela dei diritti e il dialogo tra pubblica amministrazione e cittadini, con particolare attenzione alle sfide poste dalla trasformazione digitale.

Il convegno, dal titolo “Diritti, Innovazione e Istituzioni: Il Difensore Civico e la Pubblica Amministrazione nell’era digitale”, vedrà la partecipazione di rappresentanti istituzionali, accademici ed esperti del settore, chiamati a confrontarsi su temi sempre più centrali quali la semplificazione amministrativa, l’accesso ai servizi pubblici, l’uso delle nuove tecnologie e il ruolo dell’intelligenza artificiale nella gestione dei procedimenti.

Ad aprire i lavori saranno i saluti istituzionali di Marino Fardelli, Difensore civico della Regione Lazio e presidente del Coordinamento nazionale dei Difensori civici, affiancato da Giuseppe Cangemi, vicepresidente del Consiglio regionale del Lazio, e da Marika Rotondi, presidente della Commissione speciale per la semplificazione amministrativa. Interverranno inoltre Luciano Nobili, presidente della Commissione speciale PNRR e Grandi Eventi, e Giosy Pierpaolo Tomasello, segretaria generale del Consiglio regionale.

La seconda parte dell’incontro sarà dedicata agli interventi di approfondimento. Tra i relatori figurano Eleonora Zazza, presidente del CORECOM Lazio, Alessandro Sterpa dell’Università degli Studi della Tuscia, Ernesto Belisario, avvocato esperto di diritto delle tecnologie e intelligenza artificiale, e Giovanni Anastasi, presidente di Formez PA. Il dibattito sarà moderato dal giornalista Gaetano Orticelli dell’Ufficio stampa del Consiglio regionale del Lazio.

Uno dei momenti più significativi della giornata sarà la prima edizione del “Premio Caterina Sparagna”, istituito in memoria della studentessa già distintasi nell’ambito del progetto “Il Difensore Civico tra i banchi di scuola”. Il riconoscimento è finalizzato a valorizzare l’impegno delle giovani generazioni sui temi della cittadinanza attiva, della difesa civica e della tutela dei diritti, attraverso elaborati creativi e multimediali.

Alla cerimonia di premiazione prenderanno parte anche i rappresentanti delle amministrazioni locali, tra cui il sindaco di Anagni Daniele Natalia e il sindaco di Acuto Augusto Agostini, a testimonianza del forte legame tra istituzioni territoriali e percorsi di educazione civica.

Ampio spazio sarà dedicato proprio agli studenti delle scuole superiori del Lazio, protagonisti del progetto educativo promosso dal Difensore civico. I ragazzi interverranno attivamente con domande, contributi e riflessioni, trasformando l’evento in un’occasione concreta di confronto diretto con le istituzioni.

L’iniziativa si configura dunque come un momento di dialogo e approfondimento di grande rilevanza, in cui il tema della digitalizzazione della pubblica amministrazione viene affrontato non solo sotto il profilo tecnologico, ma anche – e soprattutto – in relazione alla tutela dei diritti dei cittadini. Un’occasione per ribadire il ruolo strategico del Difensore civico come garante di equità, trasparenza e accessibilità nell’azione amministrativa, in un contesto in continua evoluzione.

The Venice Commission is one of the key expert bodies of the Council of Europe in strengthening democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights. Through its independent legal opinions, the Commission assists states in shaping legislation and institutional solutions based on respect for constitutional principles and the highest European standards. The most recent request from Slovenia was submitted to the Venice Commission in 2000 in relation to the electoral system.

The Ombudswoman emphasised that the recommendations of the Venice Commission provide important guidance for ensuring a stable and predictable legal environment, as well as for preventing systemic human rights violations. She stressed the importance of their timely and consistent implementation, particularly at times when democratic institutions are under increased pressure. She also welcomed the updated Rule of Law Checklist, adopted in December last year, which highlights the role of the Ombudsman and national human rights institutions. In addition, the institution of the Ombudsman may submit a request to the Venice Commission concerning legislation defining its competences and functioning.

The interlocutors agreed on the importance of strengthening professional cooperation while preserving the autonomy and independence of both institutions. They emphasised that open dialogue and the exchange of good practices contribute to more effective protection of individuals’ rights and to strengthening the democratic resilience of society.

When 14 April 2026

Where Online, Austria

Organised By OECD

External event

FRA will contribute to the Virtual OECD Government Foresight Community (GFC) Day 2026. It will take place on 14 April.

FRA will hold a Community Exchange session on fundamental rights in the EU in 2040. The session will be part of parallel breakout discussions. FRA’s contribution will include a short presentation of up to 20 minutes, followed by discussion. The session may also take a more interactive format, such as a discussion‑led exchange or a mini‑workshop, depending on participant engagement. 

The participants will be mostly made up of strategic foresight practitioners in the public sector (governments and international organisations), and foresight and related experts from academia, NGOs, and the private sector. 

Introduction

Public bodies are judged not only by what they do, but also by who they reach, who they hear, and who they protect. 

Inclusiveness is central to the very purpose of the Office of the Ombudsman. 

The Ombudsman serves everyone, every person, including those who are least likely to complain or least confident that they will be treated fairly. 

Inclusiveness therefore requires active outreach and equitable treatment.

Legitimacy

The Ombudsman is a trusted Office because it is independent, fair and open to all.  Considerable are the injustices that do not become written complaints.  Some fear adverse or punitive effects.  Others perceive procedures as complex.  Others feel lost because of language or literacy obstacles.  The Ombudsman is there for these as well.

Access

Inclusiveness begins with access. In this country, access to the Ombudsman is inclusive because the Office has in place multiple complaint channels (online, in person, phone, mail), plain-language communication, and one-to-one meetings and networking. 

Listening

For many complainants, particularly those who are vulnerable, the opportunity to be heard and to receive attention is itself justice. 

Considerable in number are the people who approach the Ombudsman after failed attempts to obtain a response from a public office. Simply being heard—having one’s story acknowledged—is often the first step toward restoring trust.

Equality

Equality does not mean identical treatment. Inclusiveness requires equality, which acknowledges differences.  A person in detention may require proactive assistance to lodge a complaint. A person with a disability may need adjustments to participate fully. A non-national complainant may need reassurance of impartiality.  An elderly person may require adapted communication.  The Ombudsman does not privilege some rather than others but strives for level treatment where everyone has a fair chance to be heard.

Impartiality

It means independence from bias and improper influence. Inclusiveness strengthens impartiality.

Weight

Inclusiveness carries moral weight because it affirms the dignity of every person and rejects the idea that some people matter less than others.  An inclusive Ombudsman does not take sides—but always takes people seriously.

Equity

Equity means treating people fairly.  Justice is not blind to reality. People are not a file number and therefore cannot be overlooked. 

The Ombudsman plays a key role in identifying acts, omissions or practices that constitute maladministration [Art 22(1) and (2) of Chapter 385] When one person receives a benefit or opportunity that another, in comparable circumstances, is denied without justification, the Ombudsman intervenes.  Equity is not only about helping the vulnerable, but also about maintaining integrity and consistency in public administration.

Conclusion

Inclusiveness strengthens the rule of law and transforms justice from a legal concept into a lived reality. Fairness is measured not only by rules and procedures, but by outcomes and human impact.  The Ombudsman strives to ensure that justice is not reserved for the few, but shared by all. 

Dürfen Gemeinden analoge Anschlagtafeln entfernen und Bürgerinnen und Bürger dafür auf digitale Informationsquellen wie Facebook, Whatsapp oder die Hompage verweisen? In der ORF Sendung "Bürgeranwalt" hält Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz fest: "Menschen haben ein Recht auf analoge Informationen!"

In der Waldviertler Katastralgemeinde Saaß informierte eine Anschlagtafel Bewohner und Urlaubsgäste über Veranstaltungen, Öffnungszeiten von Geschäften, welche Ärzte im Dienst sind und noch mehr. Aufgrund des schlechten baulichen Zustandes wurde die Anschlagtafel entfernt. Das zuständige Gemeindeamt Litschau verweist darauf, dass sie u.a. durch digitale Informationsquellen wie whatsapp, Facebook und die Gemeinde-Hompage ersetzt wird. Herr B. wandte sich deshalb an die Volksanwaltschaft. In der ORF Sendung „Bürgeranwalt“ vom 11.4.2026 verweist Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz auf das Recht zu analoger Information.

„So geht das nicht! Warum sollen Bürger und Urlaubsgäste einer Whatsapp Gruppe beitreten oder auf Facebook sein, nur um Informationen zu bekommen, die bisher einfach von einer Anschlagtafel abzulsesen waren. Mir fehlt hier das Verständnis der Gemeinde für die Bedürfnisse der Menschen. Digitale Kommunikationswege in allen Ehren, aber die Gemeinde darf nicht voraussetzen, dass alle Bürgerinnen und Bürger digital firm sind“, hält Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz fest. Als „datenschutzrechtlich bedenklich“ bezeichnet sie jene Whatsapp-Gruppe, die derzeit privat von der Ortsvorsteherin geführt wird. „Ich forderte die Gemeinde Litschau auf, die Anschlagtafel in Saaß wieder aufzustellen und auch die Anschlagtafeln in acht weiteren von ihr verwalteten Orten aufrechtzuerhalten.“

Lärmbelästigung durch Kanaldeckel

Seit in der Gemeinde Mischendorf im Südburgenland das Kanalsystem erneuert wurde, klagt Frau G. über Lärmbelästigung durch den Kanaldeckel auf der Landstraße vor ihrem Haus. Sie vermutet, dass es bei den Bauarbeiten zu Fehlern bei der Konstruktion des Behälters unter dem Kanaldeckel kam und wandte sich an die Volksanwaltschaft. Der Bürgermeister verwies darauf, dass es sich derzeit noch um ein Provisorium handle, da die Arbeiten noch nicht abgeschlossen sind. Zudem kündigte er an, gemeinsam mit der ausführenden Baufirma und der Betroffenen Ursachen für eine mögliche Lärmbelästigung zu untersuchen. Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz findet diese Herangehensweise sehr vernünftig: „Grundsätzlich ist der Gemeinde bis jetzt noch kein Fehler anzulasten. Ich empfehle einen Sachverständigen hinzuzuziehen und auf Ursaschenforschung zu gehen, bevor die finale Deckschicht angebracht wird.“