In 2024, too, Human Rights Ombudsman Peter Svetina continues his visits to municipalities since he wishes to bring the institution of the Ombudsman closer to as many citizens as possible. On 12 January 2024, Ombudsman Svetina visited four municipalities in the Gorenjska region, where he met with their mayors and opened Ombudsman’s Corners. First, he met with the mayor of Bohinj, then the mayor of Gorje, Tržič, and finally the mayor of Naklo.

He talked with all of them about the challenges and most pressing issues they encounter in their work. The Ombudsman assured them that, within his jurisdiction, he will act with the bodies responsible. Every year, the Ombudsman receives several thousand letters and complaints in which individuals ask for help because they believe their rights have been violated. “These matters mostly pertain to the violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms and the principles of good governance and equity. We pay special attention to the violation of children’s rights, rights of persons with disabilities, older people, foreigners, and other groups of inhabitants,” emphasised Ombudsman Svetina at his meetings with the mayors.

After every meeting, Ombudsman Svetina, accompanied by the mayors, opened and presented the Ombudsman’s Corner, which is equipped with a stand on which people can find useful information about the work of the Ombudsman in the form of leaflets and brochures as well as a complaint form. “The Ombudsman’s Corner gives us another opportunity to step closer to our citizens in their local environment and help them if they find themselves in distress or have trouble finding answers or clarifications from various institutions and bodies. Information is available not only in the digital form but also in print, since many people have problems navigating through the flood of information online,” explained Svetina.

He added that the Ombudsman’s Corners have been very well received at municipalities and that he has noticed an increase in complaints due to greater recognisability of the institution of the Ombudsman. “Ombudsman’s Corners have been set up in 55 municipalities so far and I am pleased that municipalities have started contacting us with a desire to set up an Ombudsman’s Corner at their location. I am aware of the fact that I will not be able to install an Ombudsman’s Corner in every municipality in Slovenia by the end of my term, yet I aim to do so in as many as possible. I am convinced that they contribute to people getting acquainted with our work and our competences and make it is easier for them to understand when they can turn to us and what kind of help we can offer them in the enforcement of their rights,” declared Ombudsman Svetina.

Ombudsman Diana Kovacheva approached Andrey Tsekov, Minister of Regional Development and Public Works; Nikolay Nankov, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Regional Policy, Public Works and Local Self-Government; Delian Dobrev, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Energy; Ivailo Aleksiev, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy Development Agency; and Anna Martinova-Petkova, Executive Director of the Audit of European Union Funds Executive Agency and brought to them the piles of complaints from associations of owners from different regions of the country as well as from mayors of municipalities to report problems under Procedure BG-RRP-4.023 “Support for sustainable energy renovation of the residential building stock – Stage I” under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan.

11 January 2024

Ombudsman Diana Kovacheva approached Andrey Tsekov, Minister of Regional Development and Public Works; Nikolay Nankov, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Regional Policy, Public Works and Local Self-Government; Delian Dobrev, Chair of the Parliamentary Committee on Energy; Ivailo Aleksiev, Executive Director of the Sustainable Energy Development Agency; and Anna Martinova-Petkova, Executive Director of the Audit of European Union Funds Executive Agency and brought to them the piles of complaints from associations of owners from different regions of the country as well as from mayors of municipalities to report problems under Procedure BG-RRP-4.023 “Support for sustainable energy renovation of the residential building stock – Stage I” under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan.

The discontent has been provoked by the exclusion from the application process for the free of charge rehabilitation despite the compliance with all needed requirements as set out in the Application Guidelines for the Procedure. Citizens disagree with the evaluations of the investment proposals, which they see as unfair. They express doubt about the impartiality of the analysis of the energy efficiency of the applicants, the buildings, and the non-exercise of control on this analysis. Citizens object strongly to the imbalance found in the buildings approved for rehabilitation in the municipalities in some of which there is not even one building approved.

“Regardless of the significant efforts made and the financial resource that is not small and that was invested (and that will be lost in the event of non-participation) to meet the set criteria, citizens are precluded to join the procedure for free,” the Ombudsman wrote.

Further, she wrote that the Chamber of Energy Auditors in Bulgaria, among other, entertains suspicions about prejudiced selection and insists on access to information about the order of appointment of the evaluation panel, the number of the panel members and their skills and asks to have the reports after the conclusion of the evaluation procedure.

The Ombudsman attached concrete complaints from associations of owners of residential buildings that had not been approved for rehabilitation in towns and cities as follows: Stara Zagora, Aitos, Svilengrad, Shoumen, Veliko Turnovo, Plovdiv, Sofia, Sandanski, Lovech, among other. There people ask questions about the evaluation, the vague criteria and the non-availability of sufficient information and, accordingly, request that an appeal procedure be initiated and give specific reasons for that.

For instance, one of the citizens’ associations asks for assistance to protect the rights of the owners of a condominium who have been making efforts in good faith ever since 2016 to contribute to the energy efficiency of their building but the 108 points awarded under the current procedure put them on a reserve list for participation in a second stage subject to 20% co-financing which they cannot afford.

Another association insists on a complete check of the evaluation of proposals and the disclosure of the reasons for the drastic cuts of the sums allocated as compared to the preset ceilings.

Third: it is considered that the announced results do not reflect, in a correct and fair manner, the cost of projects submitted within the procedure given the fact that there is not even one single project approved in their municipality (Aitos).

An association from Mladost residential area in Lovech expresses the disagreement of all owners with the result of the building under the project as, in their view, it does not reflect, in a correct and fair manner, the cost of the projects and they ask for a reconsideration of the project proposal and for the provision of complete information, including information about the possibility to contest the evaluation.

Another association of owners from Lovech objects to the criterion of renewable energy, as for example pellets or firewood, as “these automatically push the applicant to the bottom of the ranking list”, compared to approved similar buildings that have a different type of heating.

Owners from Sandanski request the reconsideration of the result of a project proposal rated with 108 points. The rating is questioned as they state that it was just one project approved for the municipality of Sandanski and express suspicions about the delivery of false energy certificates.

Moreover, an association of owners from Stata Zagora insists on “a complete revision of the Program itself, a complete reconsideration of the evaluation of the blocks of flats and a complete recalculation of the points awarded”.

“Very few of the associations that are on the reserve list for participation in Stage II, as indicated in the complaints, will be able to afford the required co-financing, therefore, I find it necessary to make an analysis on the possible alternatives, including the option of reallocation of funds,” Prof. Kovacheva wrote.

She added that the general public had been informed about the objections of the mayors of the municipalities Rousse, Dimitrovgrad, Smolyan, Stara Zagora, etc. who similarly insist on a revision of the selection and point out divergences between the funds planned and the funds really disbursed.

The Ombudsman warned about the obstacle to the possibility of funds from the National Recovery and Resilience Plan to reach more municipalities and to avoid a significant local concentration of investments in certain municipalities and regions.

“In view of the above-stated reasons and in line with Art. 19, para 1, subpara 7 and Art. 20, para 1, subpara 2 of the Ombudsman Act, I am addressing you in keeping with the powers provided for in the Spatial Development Act, the Energy Efficiency Act, the Management of Resources from the European Funds under Shared Management Act and other relevant acts with a proposal for complete consideration of the complaints lodged and objections made by the owners’ associations and to exercise control, among other matters, on: 1) compliance with the criteria as set in The Conditions to Apply for Funding under the Procedure  “Support for sustainable energy renovation of the residential building stock – Stage I” by the selection of proposals for investment by end beneficiaries under the sub-measure “Support for sustainable energy renovation of the residential building stock”; 2) energy audit and verification whether the methods adopted were properly applied in the energy efficiency analysis. If any violations are found, corrective measures should be applied to prevent action that may be detrimental to the process of energy renovation of the residential buildings,” the Ombudsman insisted.

Further, Prof. Kovacheva recommended that a broad public awareness campaign be launched to explain, inter alia, other existing options for citizens to become beneficiaries of funding to achieve energy efficiency of their residential buildings (such as the Development of Regions Program 2021-2027, the National Decarbonization Fund, the Just Transition Fund) and to encourage the input to the process on the part of energy poverty-stricken people.

OMBUDSMAN'S RECEPTION-ROOM

• address: 22 George Washington str.,
  1202, Sofia
• phone: (+359 2) 810 6955; fax: (+359 2) 810 6963
• e-mail: priemna@ombudsman.bg

PRESS CENTER OF THE O

The Office of the Ombudsman has recently launched new complaint clinics in Cork and Mallow. Staff from the office will visit Citizens Information Centres Cork City and Mallow once a month on the second Wednesday of each month to take complaints from members of the public. The times and dates are available on our website and advertised in local newspapers. You can find more information here.

Press Coverage:

RedFM - Neil Predeville Show (42:00)

Dr. Ákos Kozma and his staff members conducted an on-site inspection at the Hajdú-Bihar County Remand Prison on 16 November 2023 in the framework of the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture (OPCAT) National Preventive Mechanism (NPM). The Ombudsman was received by Prison Major General, Deputy Director General for Finance and Detention of the Hungarian Prison Service Headquarters János Schmehl, as well as Prison Lieutenant Colonel, Prison Commander László Fazekas.

During the visit, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights of Hungary was informed on the operation of the institution with a capacity of 180.
The Ombudsman will draw up a report about the visit.
The photos displayed at www.ajbh.hu are owned by the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights of Hungary. All rights reserved.

An employee failed to manage the requests made by inmates and, among other things, answered inmates on a post-it note without a signature. In the decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsman stresses the importance of carrying out, in every individual case, a thorough assessment of whether a request can be handled on the basis of the Swedish Prison and Probation Service’s service obligations or whether it is a formal matter. Furthermore, the Parliamentary Ombudsman recalls that the Swedish Prison and Probation Service should be generous in permitting conversations between an inmate and a lawyer who is assisting the inmate with a legal matter and that such a conversation can be of an urgent nature.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has been compelled to highlight two cases where a council has not acted to put things right in good time.

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council has taken too long to carry out the Ombudsman’s recommendations in two separate education complaints, leading the LGSCO to publish reports on both cases.

In the first case, the council agreed to update its transport to education policy for young adults with Special Educational Needs. Despite agreeing to this in 2022, the process is not expected to be complete till Spring 2024.

In the second complaint, the council agreed to improve the service it provides to children who are being home educated, and whose parents want them to return to school. In this case the council failed to apologise to the family who complained, or provide them with a sum for additional tutoring to make up for the missed education.

In both cases, the council has now agreed to fresh recommendations to improve its services along with carrying out the previously agreed actions.

Paul Najsarek, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

"It's essential that councils put in place our recommendations and we will take action to highlight where this is not the case.

“In both these cases the council agreed to our recommendations – and timescales – to put things right for families in its borough, and at no time did it let us know these would not be achievable. These failures can only have compounded the dismay felt by these families following their initial complaints.

“It should not have taken the threat of publicly highlighting these failures for the council to take more urgent action. However, I am pleased the council has agreed to the further recommendations I have made to put things right and will be paying close attention to ensuring these are carried out without delay."

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In the first case the council has agreed to provide the Ombudsman with evidence to show it has carried out actions to issue a revised post-16 transport policy by the end of May 2024.

In the second case, the council has apologised to the family and provided the required payments to them. It has also introduced a range of new measures, including a new policy on elective home education. The team responsible for this service has since been restructured and additional staff employed.

It has introduced additional support for families who want their children to be re-integrated into school and provided staff training on good complaint handling.

Article date: 11 January 2024