How do Czech authorities respond when a foreign national contacts them in a language other than the official ones (Czech or Slovak)? This was the subject of a new study by the Ombudsman. The findings show that authorities do not handle electronic submissions in foreign languages consistently. The complexity of the submission and the language skills of officials play a role. The Ministry of the Interior has called on public authorities to follow the recommendations arising from the Ombudsman’s research.

“Officials must not ignore a submission simply because it is not in the official language. They may only request a certified translation from a foreign language for submissions that initiate administrative proceedings,” explained Ombudsman Stanislav Křeček.

In his research, he focused only on electronic submissions that do not initiate proceedings. Therefore, foreigners are not required to provide a certified translation in such cases.

The Ombudsman collected data through a questionnaire sent to ministries, other central administrative authorities (such as the Czech Telecommunication Office and the Energy Regulatory Office), selected supervisory bodies (for example, the Czech Trade Inspection Authority, the Czech School Inspectorate, and the General Financial Directorate), as well as regional authorities, municipal authorities, and municipal offices with extended powers.

What did the findings reveal?

Similar Experience, Different Procedures: Authorities Lack an Unified Approach

Ninety percent of the authorities contacted by the Ombudsman took part in the survey. However, a total of 336 responses were received from 262 authorities—some institutions provided more than one response because procedures for receiving and processing foreign-language submissions are not uniform across their internal departments.

“It is unacceptable for different departments within the same authority to follow different procedures. Based on the survey results, we have formulated several recommendations. Most authorities have promised to follow them,” said the Ombudsman, adding that he is prepared to monitor compliance with these commitments in the future. The Ministry of the Interior also presented the Ombudsman’s proposals at a regular coordination meeting, calling on authorities to adhere to them.

This issue is important because submissions in foreign languages are not rare. They are most frequently encountered by supervisory bodies and other central government authorities (71%) and least frequently (54%) by municipal authorities with extended powers (excluding city councils).

Official or Translator: Who Will Answer Me—and How?

English, German, Polish, Ukrainian, but also Italian, French, and even Hungarian in some areas—officials encounter all of these languages. Some civil servants are able to translate such submissions themselves and respond in the same language. Officials at ministries, central administrative authorities, and supervisory bodies are generally better equipped linguistically than employees of regional authorities, municipal offices, and municipalities with extended powers.

“The good news is that authorities require translations into the official language only in a minority of cases where they are not actually necessary. This happens least often at ministries and most often at regional and municipal authorities, where translations are required for roughly 40% of foreign-language submissions,” said the Ombudsman. Ministry officials also respond in Czech less often (27%), while officials at regional and municipal authorities use Czech most frequently in their replies (62%).

Foreign-Language Information on Websites

The survey also looked at whether authorities provide foreign-language information on their websites. It found that regional authorities and city councils most often offer foreign-language versions (88%), followed by ministries (60%), and municipal authorities with extended powers (52%).

Authorities often rely on automatic translation tools for their websites, and officials are increasingly using them as well when handling simple foreign-language submissions.

What Does the Ombudsman Recommend to Authorities?

• Authorities must not ignore submissions solely because they are not written in the official language.
• They may request a certified translation only if the submission initiates administrative proceedings.
• For other types of submissions, authorities may request a translation only when their staff lack the necessary language skills and cannot use available online translation tools.
• Any request for translation must be addressed directly to the sender, preferably in the language of the original submission.
• Authorities should strive to ensure that their staff are sufficiently linguistically equipped—with English as the minimum standard.
• Authorities should adopt unified internal rules for handling foreign-language submissions.

When you deal with the public service and/or the public administration, you should receive a service you can trust. You should get clear and satisfactory information. You should get fair treatment. You should get a decision on time.

This is why the Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman published a handy booklet entitled “The Principles of Good Administration” in June 2025.

The Office set practical standards for everyday services provided by the public authorities and that you routinely rely on in your daily lives. In simple terms, they are the services that make society function normally.

They also help you understand what you can expect from the public service and/or the public administration.

Good administration: not a favour

The starting point is simple. Good administration is not something you wish for but a right you enjoy when you deal with the administration of the affairs of Government : a licence, a pension, a benefit, a fine, a permit, a medical appointment, a residence document, a school service and many others.  When the handling of a process is unclear, delayed or worse tainted by bias or careless, then not only could there inconvenience but a breach of one`s rights.

The rule of law: the overriding principle

Everyone is bound by the law.  Authority has to be  exercised in accordance with clear, fair, and publicly known rules, not according to personal discretion or arbitrary decision-making : the public service and/or the public administration are no exception.  This is the baseline.

Where administrative matters are concerned, for the public service and/or the public administration to act strictly according to law is not enough.  They have to observe a higher standard basically fairness.  In fact if an act or omission in the administration of Government appears to be contrary to law, that act or omission can amount to maladministration.  A decision can be legally valid and still be wrong in its application according to the facts and circumstances of every case.  That is really why  fairness, impartiality, proportionality, consistency, and legal certainty are the criteria that matter for good administration as opposed to maladministration.

In practice, this includes:

• Adoption by public offices of clear criteria for their that receive application consistently.
• Avoidance by public offices of heavy handed measures when lighter measures would achieve the same lawful aim.
• Equal treatment of persons by public offices, regardless of  who those persons are or who they know.

The six core principles

There are six core principles that all should know where matters of administration are concerned:

Transparency – Decisions should be taken in accordance with established practice and clear procedures. Information should be clear to understand and accessible. Public bodies should explain their actions without having any plausible reason to hide anything.

Accountability – Public bodies should answer for their decisions and correct mistakes.

Integrity – Public bodies should act in the public interest. Conflicts of interest have to be ruled out.

Responsiveness – Public offices should listen, reply on time, and strive towards to achieve solutions.

Efficiency and effectiveness – Public services should use resources well and deliver results without avoidable delay.

Inclusiveness – Public services should be accessible to everyone and treat everyone fairly.

Why these principles matter

The public service and/or the public administration face new challenges. Demand rises. 

Systems become all the more digital. Artificial intelligence is swiftly becoming all the more part and parcel of decision making.

Artificial intelligence is no exception to the rule of law provided rules are established that ensure that who creates artificial intelligence and the tools that are devised are fully respectful of human rights and dignity.

What will follow

The informative articles that follow will go deeper into the issues that have been raised today.

The Public Defender settled the sixth case in a row involving alleged discrimination on the ground of health status in the service sector. This case is particularly important because the settlement provided for the first time compensation for moral damages, which is a significant step forward in improving the rights of alleged victims of discrimination.

The parties fully complied with all the conditions stipulated in the settlement. It should be emphasized that the use of an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, such as settlement between the parties, contributes to a quick, constructive and less formalized resolution of the conflict, which is one of the most effective means of protecting human rights.

The Public Defender will continue to actively use the settlement mechanism in cases of alleged discrimination.