Details

David sitzt seit einem Jahr zuhause, weil Regeln von NÖ und Wien nicht zusammenpassen

Der 17-jährige David F. ist am Wiener AKH wegen Epilepsie und einer Autismus-Spektrum-Störung in Behandlung. In Wien hat er auch bei seinem Onkel seinen Hauptwohnsitz gemeldet. Und in Wien wollte er eine Ausbildung bei der Berufsqualifizierung „On the Job“ von Wien Work machen. In Niederösterreich, wo seine Eltern leben, gibt es dafür laut Davids Eltern keine passende und mit öffentlichen Verkehrsmitteln erreichbare Möglichkeit. „Weil aber für Menschen mit Behinderungen die Bundesländer zuständig sind, und weil die Regelungen aus Wien und Niederösterreich nicht zusammenpassen, fühlte sich niemand für die Finanzierung von Davids Ausbildung zuständig – und er sitzt schon seit einem Jahr zuhause und wartet“, kritisiert Volksanwalt Bernhard Achitz. Das hat bei David bereits zu einer Depression geführt, sagen seine Eltern.

Wien und Niederösterreich hätten schneller Lösung finden müssen

Erst jetzt, nachdem sich die Volksanwaltschaft eingeschaltet hat und auch die ORF-Sendung „Bürgeranwalt“ zu recherchieren begonnen hat, zeichnet sich eine Lösung ab: Niederösterreich übernimmt die Kosten bis zur Volljährigkeit Davids, ab dann trägt sie der Fonds Soziales Wien (FSW). Volksanwalt Achitz: „Es freut mich, dass Wien und Niederösterreich Davids Weg in die Berufstätigkeit nicht länger versperren. Er hat vielfältige Begabungen, etwa technisches Verständnis und ein absolutes Gehör. Ich kritisiere aber, dass diese Lösung nicht gleich von Anfang an möglich war. So hat David ein Jahr seines Lebens mit Warten verbracht.“

Länder sollen sich abstimmen, damit Betroffene nicht zwischen den Stühlen sitzen

Hintergrund ist, dass Niederösterreich einen Hautwohnsitz in Niederösterreich als Förderbedingung vorsieht – den hat David aber nicht. Nach dem Wiener Gesetz ist aber nicht Davids Hauptwohnsitz ausschlaggebend, sondern derjenige der Eltern – weil die in Niederösterreich leben, gibt es keine Wiener Förderung. „Wie auch beim Thema Pflegeheimfinanzierung zeigt sich an diesem Beispiel, dass die Länder ihre eigenen Gesetze machen, und die passen nicht zusammen. Hier ist dringend mehr Abstimmung notwendig, damit die Betroffenen nicht zwischen den Stühlen zu sitzen kommen“, sagt Volksanwalt Achitz.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon, presented the publication Upholding Good Governance in Challenging Times, the Role of the Ombudsman to the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

The book brings together the proceedings of the International Ombudsman Conference held in Malta on 15 and 16 October 2025 under the same theme. The conference gathered ombudsman and human rights institutions, public service leaders, and academics to reflect on the evolving role of oversight institutions in a rapidly changing environment. It was considered important that the substance of these contributions be preserved beyond the event itself. For this reason, the papers, reflections and discussions were compiled into this publication as a reference for future use.

The Ombudsman noted that the publication captures the expertise and perspectives shared during the conference and stands as a testimony to the value of international exchange and cooperation between institutions committed to good governance and the protection of rights. He expressed the hope that the book will serve as a useful resource for ombudsman and human rights institutions, public service leaders, academics and all those interested in the promotion of good governance.

The Speaker thanked Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon for the initiative behind both the conference and the publication. He described the book as a meaningful contribution to institutional memory and public understanding, preserving principles and reflections that should continue to guide democratic governance beyond the anniversary year.

Recalling his address at the 30th Anniversary Conference, the Speaker reiterated that the Office of the Ombudsman is more than a mechanism for receiving complaints. He described it as an institutional conscience whose loyalty must always remain with the people and with the truth. He underlined that, particularly in challenging times, the Ombudsman plays a vital role in safeguarding democracy and upholding accountability.

The Speaker concluded by reaffirming that good governance cannot endure without honesty and courage, and that truth must remain paramount beyond institutions, narratives or political preference.

Il Coordinamento Nazionale dei Difensori Civici delle Regioni e delle Province Autonome ha inviato una lettera al Ministro per la Pubblica Amministrazione, Paolo Zangrillo, per segnalare alcune criticità emerse nell’utilizzo del servizio SEND, la piattaforma digitale per la notifica degli atti della Pubblica Amministrazione gestita da PagoPA S.p.A. e introdotta dalla normativa sulla digitalizzazione dei servizi pubblici.

Le segnalazioni provengono sia da cittadini sia da diversi Uffici di difesa civica sul territorio nazionale e riguardano in particolare tre aspetti: l’accessibilità del sistema per le persone meno digitalizzate, le garanzie di effettiva ricezione delle notifiche in presenza di problemi tecnici e la necessità di una comunicazione più chiara da parte delle amministrazioni mittenti e del gestore della piattaforma.

La questione è stata portata all’attenzione del Coordinamento nel corso dell’ultima riunione nazionale, durante la quale la collega Veronika Meyer ha voluto rappresentare le criticità riscontrate nel sistema di notificazione digitale degli atti della Pubblica Amministrazione, con particolare riferimento al servizio SEND – PagoPA, evidenziando alcune difficoltà applicative emerse nell’esperienza concreta dei cittadini e degli uffici di difesa civica.
Il contributo della collega si inserisce nel lavoro di monitoraggio svolto dal Coordinamento nazionale, che raccoglie e valorizza le segnalazioni provenienti dai territori per trasformarle in proposte di miglioramento del funzionamento della pubblica amministrazione.

Secondo il Coordinamento dei Difensori Civici, il processo di innovazione digitale della Pubblica Amministrazione rappresenta un passaggio fondamentale per rendere i servizi più efficienti e moderni, ma deve essere accompagnato da strumenti e procedure che garantiscano pienamente i diritti dei cittadini, in particolare il diritto di difesa, di informazione e di partecipazione ai procedimenti amministrativi.

“L’innovazione tecnologica deve procedere insieme alla tutela effettiva dei diritti”, ha dichiarato Marino Fardelli, Difensore Civico della Regione Lazio e Presidente del Coordinamento Nazionale dei Difensori Civici Italiani. “Per questo riteniamo importante avviare un confronto istituzionale con il Ministero per approfondire il funzionamento del servizio SEND e valutare eventuali miglioramenti, nell’interesse dei cittadini e delle amministrazioni”.

Il Coordinamento ha quindi manifestato la propria disponibilità a collaborare con il Ministero della Pubblica Amministrazione per individuare soluzioni che possano rafforzare l’efficacia del sistema di notifiche digitali, mantenendo un equilibrio tra innovazione, semplificazione amministrativa e protezione dei diritti.

The government has submitted an amendment to the Building Act to the Chamber of Deputies without first conducting a public consultation process. The Ombudsman disagrees with this approach. He warns that the amendment provides insufficient protection for public interests such as the protection of health, the environment, and cultural heritage. He also points to a weakening of the rights of citizens and other participants in building permit proceedings.

“I consider it inappropriate for such an extensive and serious change to the legal framework to be pushed through hastily and without proper expert discussion,” said Ombudsman Stanislav Křeček regarding the amendment to the Building Act.
The amendment was approved by the Government of the Czech Republic on 16 December without assessment by experts, ministries, regional authorities, or professional chambers through the standard interministerial consultation procedure. The bill is now at the stage of parliamentary deliberation in the Chamber of Deputies.

Speed Prioritised Over Health, Environment and Heritage

“Speed and efficiency in construction are being prioritised at the expense of other public interests—such as the protection of health, the environment, cultural heritage, or the quality of housing. I find it unacceptable that such fundamental changes are being prepared in haste and without sufficient expert debate,” the Ombudsman explained.

For this reason, Stanislav Křeček has decided to address specific comments to members of three parliamentary committees—the Economic Affairs Committee, the Constitutional and Legal Affairs Committee, and the Committee on Public Administration and Regional Development. He is asking MPs to take his objections into account during the consideration of the amendment.

Weaker Rules on Illegal Construction and Noise

The Ombudsman points to changes that would sideline certain aspects of the public interest. For example, the amendment would allow construction permits to be issued even in areas where development would previously have been impermissible—such as the installation of photovoltaic panels in heritage protection zones or the approval of a shopping centre in locations not permitted by zoning plans. Measures against illegal construction would be weakened. Rules for assessing noise impacts would become unclear and overly permissive. Requirements for accessibility for persons with disabilities would be reduced.

Stanislav Křeček also stresses the need to examine the human rights implications of the proposal: “The proposed wording of the amendment weakens the right to challenge decisions made by administrative authorities. I find it particularly alarming that the amendment does not allow administrative remedies against decisions on the largest construction projects, such as motorways, railways, or large residential developments. For participants in proceedings, only one option would remain—the filing of an administrative lawsuit.”

The proposal envisages the amendment to the Building Act taking effect as early as 1 July 2026.