The Estonian Chancellor of Justice has received, for the second time, the highest level of accreditation — A-status — as a national human rights institution, recognizing its continued independence and effectiveness in promoting and protecting human rights. This was the second round of accreditation, during which the Chancellor’s work was evaluated for compliance with the Paris Principles adopted by the UN General Assembly.

Since January 1, 2019, the Chancellor of Justice has served as Estonia’s National Human Rights Institution (NHRI). The institution’s work is reviewed every five years through an international accreditation process organized by the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA) of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). The committee consists of four members representing human rights institutions from different regions of the world.

A-status grants the Chancellor of Justice the right to participate in and speak at the UN Human Rights Council and other international human rights forums. It also enables more active involvement in international human rights cooperation.

To obtain accreditation, the Chancellor had to complete an extensive questionnaire about activities over the past five years and respond to numerous follow-up questions. The final decision was made by the UN after the SCA held a meeting with staff from the Chancellor’s Office in Geneva in March of this year.

As part of the accreditation process, the SCA also provided some recommendations aimed at further strengthening the institution’s independence and effectiveness. Among other points, the committee emphasized the importance of ensuring adequate resources for fulfilling the institution’s mandate.

On May 1, International Workers' Day, Public Defender's representatives held an interactive event in Borjomi public space to raise citizens' awareness of labour rights and the mandate of the Public Defender in the field of labour rights.

As part of the event, stakeholders did pre-prepared tests and received information about issues relevant to them. People of different ages and professions participated in the interaction.

As is known to the public, the Public Defender of Georgia responds to each challenge related to the proper implementation of labour rights in the country and addresses the relevant agencies with recommendations and proposals, and also reflects assessments of systemic problems related to legislative shortcomings and the implementation of legislation in parliamentary reports.

The Chancellor of Justice Tuomas Pöysti has submitted his report for 2024 to the Parliament and the Government.

In 2024, a total of 1987 complaints were filed with the Chancellor of Justice while 2084 complaints were resolved. In the previous year, the Office of the Chancellor of Justice received 1668 complaints and resolved 1862. In 2024, the Chancellor of Justice continued the efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of legality oversight focusing more strongly on structural oversight. A total of 43 in-house initiatives were launched by the Chancellor of Justice in 2024. 

As for the oversight of Government activities, the number of cases increased particularly in the area of legislative projects. In 2024, 138 requests for opinions on legislative proposals were reviewed, 66 opinions were issued and 26 preliminary examinations of legislative proposals were carried out. In the context of ex ante control of government decision-making, of all the cases handled at the Government plenary sessions 1498 cases were examined and at the sessions held with the President of the Republic 400 were examined.  A total of 398 requests for corrections were issued; in other words, an order for rectification was given in 21% of the cases. 73% of the requests for corrections were concerned to legal matters.

The Chancellor of Justice's 2024 report contains a series of thematic articles on key findings and actions in the field of legality oversight as well as documentation describing legal praxis. The article "When is it advisable to request the opinion of the Constitutional Committee on a government proposal and how does the Chancellor of Justice monitor this?" discusses the Chancellor of Justice's ex ante control of legislative projects. In reality, Government proposals have demonstrably been referred to the Constitutional Committee for assessment on rather flimsy grounds, a point to which the Constitutional Committee has repeatedly drawn attention in recent times. 

The Chancellor of Justice will in future adopt a more systematic approach to ex ante control to determine whether it is legally justified and necessary to request that a draft be assessed by the Constitutional Committee. The Government is duty-bound to prepare proposals that are in compliance with the Constitution, international human rights obligations and EU law. In its proposals, the Government must demonstrate that these requirements are met or make a duly substantiated proposal to change the interpretation of the Constitution.

In recent years, court training has been criticized. This theme is addressed to in the article “Judicial training”. Striking a balance between the training needs of apprentice district judges and the efficient organisation of the court's activities is challenging.

In line with established practice, the report also includes articles by the Chancellor of Justice and the Deputy Chancellor of Justice. 

Chancellor of Justice Tuomas Pöysti discusses the demands imposed by digitalisation on legislation. On the one hand, it is advisable to safeguard fundamental rights and good governance through pro-digital legislation; on the other hand, it is important to ensure that the regulatory burden does not become excessive and create unnecessary barriers to innovation and productivity. 

Deputy Chancellor of Justice Mikko Puumalainen examines the independence and role of the supreme guardians of the law. According to the Deputy Chancellor of Justice, it might be appropriate to consider bolstering the independence and autonomy of the legality oversight exercised by the Chancellor of Justice through an amendment to the Constitution.

The annual Report of the Chancellor of Justice for 2024 in FinnishFile opens in a new tabyja-document-link-opens-in-a-new-tab

The annual Report of the Chancellor of Justice for 2024 in Swedish

Catch up on our recent activities with our latest Quarterly Bulletin.

This May edition includes links to our new training resources which have been designed to help staff in public bodies investigate complaints.  There's also links to our Case Digest on women's health and to two significant investigation reports.

In a letter addressed to the Prime Minister of the Republic of Bulgaria published today, Commissioner O’Flaherty raises concern about the situation of numerous Roma left homeless following the recent demolition of their homes by the authorities in Sofia, despite an interim measure issued by the European Court of Human Rights.

The Commissioner is concerned that more than 200 Roma were impacted and that a number of them, including vulnerable individuals, were left sleeping outdoors, without access to basic sanitation and healthcare. He notes the delays by the authorities in addressing the situation of those left homeless and the rising tensions and climate of hostility against Roma, including opposition to the provision of alternative accommodation to them in other areas of the city.

The Commissioner asks the authorities to take immediate measures to ensure the provision of emergency shelter, basic sanitary and hygienic conditions and access to essential health care, social services and legal aid for those concerned, and to prevent any violence against Roma.

At the same time, solutions should be sought to provide the affected individuals and families with adequate alternative accommodation, the suitability of which should be evaluated in consultation with those concerned and in view of their specific needs. The Commissioner notes, in this connection, the need to respect Council of Europe standards regarding the right to adequate housing of Roma and Travellers.

• Read the letter addressed to the Prime Minister of the Republic of Bulgaria

Andreas H. hat trotz einer psychischen Erkrankung immer gearbeitet. Zuerst als Mechaniker im Lagerhaus, später als Facharbeiter bei einer St. Pöltener Firma. Mit 31. März 2023 wurde er gekündigt. Weil H. zu den „begünstigten Behinderten“ gehört, hat er die Kündigung angefochten. Dann führte die unglückliche Kombination aus überlanger Verfahrensdauer beim Sozialministerium-Service (SMS) und schlechter Beratung durch das Arbeitsmarktservice (AMS) Niederösterreich dazu, dass Andreas H. einerseits 38.000 Euro Gehalt an seinen Ex-Arbeitgeber zurückzahlen muss, dass er andererseits aber für die Zeit seit April 2023 keinen Cent Arbeitslosengeld bekommen hat. Er hat sich an die Volksanwaltschaft gewandt. Volksanwalt Bernhard Achitz: „Wir konnten das AMS doch noch davon überzeugen, den damaligen Antrag auf Arbeitslosengeld gelten zu lassen. Nun sollte er also rückwirkend das Arbeitslosengeld bekommen.“

Hintergrund: Für die Kündigung eines „begünstigten Behinderten“ ist die Zustimmung des Sozialministerium-Service (SMS) notwendig. Solange das SMS prüft, ist unklar, ob es zu einer Kündigung kommt oder nicht. Entsprechend weiß man auch erst im Nachhinein, ob man arbeitslos ist oder nicht. Währenddessen muss die Firma Lohn bzw. Gehalt weiterzahlen. Stimmt das AMS der Kündigung zu, muss der Betroffene Lohn/Gehalt an den Arbeitgeber zurückzahlen.

Sozialministerium-Service braucht 15 Monate für Entscheidung

Deshalb ist es in solchen Fällen gut, sich vorsorglich arbeitslos zu melden. Darauf wurde Andreas H. von AMS NÖ nicht hingewiesen. Volksanwalt Achitz: „So etwas kann aber der Betroffene im Normalfall nicht wissen.“ Bei H. kommt aber dazu, dass das SMS extrem lang für seine Entscheidung gebraucht hat, nämlich 15 Monate statt der gesetzlichen Frist von höchstens sechs Monaten. Wegen dieser langen Verfahrensdauer hat sich die enorm hohe Summe von 38.000 Euro angesammelt, die H. zurückzahlen musste.

Das AMS meinte, man hätte nicht damit gerechnet, dass das Verfahren so ausgehen würde, dass die Kündigung genehmigt würde und H. sein Gehalt zurückzahlen müsse. Achitz in der ORF-Sendung „Bürgeranwalt“ am 26. April: „Das ist aber völlig unerheblich, man kann nie vorwegnehmen, wie ein Verfahren ausgeht. Das AMS hätte Herrn H. auf die möglichen Folgen aufmerksam machen müssen und seinen Antrag auf Arbeitslosengeld vorsorglich annehmen müssen. Dann wäre nichts passiert, und H. wäre abgesichert gewesen!“

Nach Einschreiten der Volksanwaltschaft hat das AMS Niederösterreich den Fall noch einmal geprüft. Ergebnis: Es sei nicht klar, ob H. ausreichend informiert worden sei. „Diesen Fehler nehmen wir zum Anlass, um mit Herrn H. eine Neuaufnahme seines Antrages auf Arbeitslosengeld zu starten“, so das AMS: „Die finanziellen Sorgen, die Herr H. zwischenzeitig auf sich nehmen musste, bedauern wir aufrichtig und freuen uns umso mehr, ihm letztlich eine positive Nachricht übermitteln zu können. Volksanwalt Achitz: „Es ist dem AMS hoch anzurechnen, dass sie sich das noch einmal angeschaut haben.“