The Ombudsman has submitted a request to the Constitutional Court for a declaration of unconstitutionality, with general binding force, of article 176-C of the Penal Code, which establishes the crime of ‘acts contrary to sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression’.

The petition argues that this rule, added by Article 4 of Law 15/2024 of 29 January, does not comply with the constitutional requirements of determinability imposed in criminal matters by the principle of typicality (Article 29 of the Constitution). At issue is, in particular, the degree of indeterminacy of the concepts that define the prohibited conduct and the obscurity regarding the role of the consent of those targeted.

The request for a constitutional review also extends, consequently, to the rules contained in articles 69-B, 69-C and 177 of the Penal Code, as amended by Law 15/2024, which establish accessory penalties and cases of aggravation of the penalty for this new crime.

To read the full petition, click here [in Portuguese only].

Hounslow council is refusing to offer a home to a young mother despite making a catalogue of errors which left her homeless and sofa surfing while pregnant.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has recommended London Borough of Hounslow offer the woman and her baby its next available suitable accommodation, because its errors meant she missed out on a number of secure tenancies.

But the local council is refusing to co-operate.

The woman first approached the council in May 2022 as she had been sofa surfing with friends. Over a number of months, Hounslow council:

• Told her she was on the council’s top Band 0 list for a home, despite this banding not existing
• Told her applying as homeless would reduce her chances of getting secure housing
• Asked her to complete five separate questionnaires without being allocated a housing officer
• Failed to respond to numerous requests for information
• Told her that moving out of area would not affect her application, despite this then disqualifying her from its housing register, and leaving her unable to apply to the housing register in her new borough because she has not lived there long enough
• Failed to deal properly with her subsequent complaints

The Ombudsman’s investigation into the woman’s complaint found the council failed to make any inquiries into her homelessness situation.

If it had assessed the woman’s homelessness application when it should have done, evidence shows it would have found she was ‘eligible, homeless, and in priority need’, and it should have provided her with interim accommodation immediately, but it did not. The Ombudsman found it likely the council would have accepted the main housing duty – and so provided her with temporary accommodation (a two-bedroomed self-contained property after the child was born) which would have come with its own right to an appeal, but it did not.

The council also gave the woman incorrect information that led her to believe a homelessness application would negatively impact her position on the list for a social housing tenancy. It told her that any interim and temporary homeless accommodation would likely be outside the borough to discourage her from applying. The Ombudsman found the council did this to avoid its legal duties to the woman as a homeless person.

The investigation also found the council took 77 weeks too long to assess the woman’s housing application. If it had considered her application in time, she would have been able to join the housing register. If it had dealt with her homelessness properly, this would have entitled her to Band 2 priority. The investigation found the woman missed out on several properties offered to people who applied after her.

Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, Ms Amerdeep Somal said:

“Hounslow council has left a vulnerable mother and her child without the security of knowing where she would call home at a particularly desperate time of her life. As a young pregnant person she has been forced to sofa surf despite clear evidence the council owed her a duty.

“All this has had a significant effect on her. She moved into one-bedroom shared accommodation shortly before she gave birth, and remains there to this day. All the evidence shows that if Hounslow had acted correctly, the woman would have had the safety of a social tenancy when her child was born.

“I am disappointed that, by rejecting my recommendation to offer her the next suitable property it has available, the council is failing to fully accept the gravity its incorrect advice and practice has had on this woman and her child.

“I now call on local councillors in Hounslow to do the right thing and accept the recommendation I have made to house her as soon as possible.”

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council should make the woman a direct offer of the next available two-bedroom property that meets her needs, to recognise the missed opportunity to be allocated permanent housing.

The council has not agreed to this recommendation.

The council has, however, agreed to apologise and pay the woman a combined £3,750 to recognise the time she spent in unsuitable accommodation outside the borough and the distress and frustration caused by its failings.

Article date: 17 April 2025

Luna pide que las bases de las convocatorias se publiquen antes del inicio del periodo subvencionado

El síndic de Greuges de la Comunitat Valenciana, Àngel Luna, ha recomendado a la Conselleria de Servicios Sociales, Igualdad y Vivienda que revise la denegación de una ayuda al alquiler a una ciudadana, debido a los cambios en el sistema de justificación de pago que fueron implementados ocho meses después del inicio del año subvencionado. Luna considera que esta modificación vulnera el principio de confianza legítima y el derecho a una buena administración, por lo que pide a la administración autonómica que adopte las medidas necesarias para revertir esta situación.

El defensor del pueblo valenciano inició su investigación tras la queja presentada por una ciudadana a quien se le desestimó su solicitud de ayuda al alquiler de vivienda de la convocatoria 2024. Al igual que en años anteriores, la solicitante, miembro de una familia monoparental y perceptora del ingreso mínimo vital y la renta valenciana de inclusión, abonaba el alquiler en efectivo y presentaba a la administración el justificante que el arrendador le facilitaba. Sin embargo, en la convocatoria de 2024, y a diferencia de los años anteriores, los beneficiarios de la ayuda únicamente podían justificar el pago mediante transferencia o recibo bancario. La Administración introdujo este cambio tras la publicación de las bases en agosto de 2024, cuando ya habían transcurrido ocho meses del año subvencionado, y la solicitante ya había estado pagando su alquiler en efectivo, tal como había hecho en los años previos que percibió la ayuda.

El Síndic considera que este cambio de las reglas de juego a mitad del partido vulneró el principio de confianza legítima, pues dejó a la interesada sin margen de maniobra para adaptarse al nuevo sistema durante los meses de enero a agosto de 2024. Al no poder presentar la documentación exigida, se le impidió el acceso a las ayudas, pese a cumplir con los requisitos materiales.

Como señala la interesada, si hubiese sabido antes del mes de enero de 2024 que el único sistema admitido para justificar el pago de la mensualidad iba a ser la documentación bancaria, habría realizado los pagos por medio de transferencia y hubiera podido acreditar sin mayor problema el pago según lo requerido.

En su resolución, Luna concluye que «si la Administración consideró necesario realizar un cambio en un elemento tan relevante como es el sistema de acreditación de los pagos de la renta mensual, las más elementales reglas de justicia requieren que estos sean conocidos por la ciudadanía con carácter previo al comienzo del periodo de tiempo en el que ha de ser aplicado». En este sentido, ha recomendado a la Conselleria que garantice la publicación de las convocatorias de las ayudas al alquiler de vivienda antes del inicio del ejercicio al que se refieren, para que los posibles destinatarios puedan conocerlas y adaptarse a los nuevos requisitos.

FacebookTwitterWhatsAppCompartir

In der ORF Sendung „Bürgeranwalt“ vom 19.4.2025 wurde der Fall eines Spediteurs aus Salzburg behandelt, der sich an die Volksanwaltschaft gewendet hat: Anfang der 2000er Jahre hat er in einem Gewerbepark im Pinzgau einen Betriebsgrund erworben und sich an den Kosten für eine Zufahrtsstraße samt Umkehrplatz beteiligt. Doch nun hat die Gemeinde den Umkehrplatz an den benachbarten Betrieb verkauft, wodurch die Zufahrt des Spediteurs mit großen LKWs erschwert wird und damit eine Wertminderung seines Grundstückes einhergeht.

„Tatsache ist, dass die Gemeinde den Umkehrplatz als öffentliche Verkehrsfläche ent-widmet hat. Damit ist es dem Anrainer nicht mehr möglich zu nützen, wofür er bezahlt hat. Nachdem der Anrainer den Umkehrplatzes nicht mehr nützen kann, sollte die Gemeinde ihm seinen Anteil zurückzahlen. Außerdem sprechen wir uns als Volksanwaltschaft dafür aus, dass ihm die Wertminderung seines Grundstückes zu erstatten ist“, betont die Volksanwältin und verweist auf ein grundsätzliches Problem: „Wenn die Gemeinde ein Gewerbegebiet unterhält, muss sie auch für sichere Straßen sorgen. Indem sie den Umkehrplatz verkauft hat, ist eine unmittelbare Gefahrenerhöhung entstanden. Ich appelliere an die Gemeinde, hier eine Lösung zu finden, die dem Sicherheitsanspruch der Straßenverkehrsordnung entspricht.“

Erfolg von Volksanwaltschaft und Bürgeranwalt: Badner Bahn entschuldigt sich bei Ehepaar

Die Kritik der Volksanwaltschaft und die Berichterstattung im „Bürgeranwalt“ haben dazu geführt, dass sich die Wiener Lokalbahnen bei einem älteren Ehepaar für entstandene Unannehmlichkeiten entschuldigt hat. Im Dezember 2024 blieb die Badner Bahn mitten auf der Strecke stehen. Die Fahrgäste wurden ohne Information über alternative Beförderungsmittel im Industriegebiet sich selbst überlassen.

„Mittlerweile hat sich die Geschäftsführung der Wiener Lokalbahnen bei dem Ehepaar entschuldigt. Es wurde eingeräumt, dass das Verhalten des Fahrers ein Fehler war. Die Taxikosten von 35 Euro wurden dem Ehepaar erstattet, das den Betrag der Krebshilfe gespendet hat. Zusätzlich gab es einen kleinen Präsentkorb. Das ist wirklich eine vorbildliche Entschuldigungskultur“, lobt Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz, appelliert aber an alle Beförderungsunternehmen, die Schulung von Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern zu verbessern: „Passagiere rasch zu informieren und im Bedarfsfall zu unterstützen muss selbstverständlich sein.“

Deputy-Ombudsman Mikko Sarja has issued a reprimand to the Digital and Population Data Services Agency for its unlawful actions. The Agency had neglected the timely recording of the details concerning the end of the complainant’s guardianship and the removal of the restriction of competence in the Register of Guardianship Affairs.

The recording of the details had been delayed by about two months. During this period of time, the complainant had unduly appeared to be under guardianship in the Register, even though the guardianship had already been terminated with a court decision. The Agency’s negligence was likely to make it more difficult for the complainant to independently manage their matters and violated their right to self-determination and appropriate processing of the case.

The Deputy-Ombudsman considered this serious neglect. He has therefore proposed that the State of Finland consider compensating the complainant for the violation of the complainant’s rights. In addition, the Deputy-Ombudsman has decided to investigate the Digital and Population Data Services Agency’s procedures for entering court notifications concerning guardianship matters in the Register of Guardianship Affairs.

The Deputy-Ombudsman’s decision EOAK/2077/2024 has been published on the website www.oikeusasiamies.fi.

For more information, please contact Senior Legal Adviser Juha-Pekka Konttinen, tel. +358 9 432 3338.