Pide que se aborden los déficits del sistema de protección que este caso ha puesto de manifiesto

La institución del Síndic de Greuges ha abierto una actuación de oficio a raíz de las noticias aparecidas en los medios de comunicación por las agresiones y la explotación sexual que sufrió una niña de doce años mientras se encontraba bajo la protección de la Administración de la Generalitat.  

En este contexto, la síndica pedirá información al Departamento de Derechos Sociales e Inclusión, al de Educación y al de Salud, con la voluntad de conocer las circunstancias en torno a estos hechos tan graves, las medidas tomadas una vez se ha conocido esta situación, y qué atención recibe la chica ahora que todo ha salido a la luz.  

La síndica muestra su preocupación frente a este caso y recuerda que el objetivo del sistema de protección es precisamente proporcionar a los menores un entorno alternativo a la familia que sea seguro, protector y educativo.  

En noviembre de 2023, en el informe La desinstitucionalización del sistema de protección a la infancia y la adolescencia se denunciaban carencias estructurales del sistema y se planteaban propuestas para su transformación. Así, por ejemplo, destaca la sobrerrepresentación de adolescentes en el sistema de protección (el 63 % de los niños tutelados), la falta de políticas públicas específicamente dirigidas a atender las complejidades de esta etapa vital y la clara necesidad de mejorar el acompañamiento de las familias.

El informe también alertaba de que el riesgo de explotación sexual es mayor entre las adolescentes que residen en centros del sistema de protección y, por ello, pedía a la Dirección General de Atención a la Infancia y la Adolescencia que adoptara medidas específicas para evitar que sufran estas situaciones.  

Ante esta situación, es inaplazable que se aborden los graves déficits del sistema de protección que este caso pone de manifiesto. Es imprescindible tener en cuenta las necesidades de estos adolescentes, especialmente las de las niñas y las chicas que, por su historia vital, viven una situación de gran vulnerabilidad.  

„Dass es nun wieder notwendig geworden ist, dass Rechtsanwältinnen bzw. Rechtsanwälte und Notarinnen bzw. Notare verstärkt Erwachsenenvertretungen übernehmen müssen, zeigt den großen Handlungsbedarf der Länder und Gemeinden bei der Prävention“, sagt Volksanwalt Bernhard Achitz: „Gesetzlich vorgeschriebene Maßnahmen wie Unterstützungskreise gibt es oft nicht. Selbstbestimmung sollte aber so weit wie möglich gefördert werden. Eine Erwachsenenvertretung darf nur das allerletzte Mittel sein.“ Die Zahl der Erwachsenenvertretungen dürfte auch dadurch unnötig in die Höhe getrieben werden, dass Einrichtungen für Menschen mit Behinderungen, aber auch Alten- und Pflegeheime eine Erwachsenenvertretung für die Aufnahme neuer Bewohnerinnen und Bewohner zur Bedingung machen.

Die Volksanwaltschaft setzt sich auf verschiedenen Ebenen mit dem Thema Erwachsenenvertretung auseinander. Einerseits beschweren sich betroffene Menschen über Erwachsenenvertretungen. Andererseits berichten die Kommissionen über verschiedene Wahrnehmungen bei ihrer Tätigkeit in der präventiven Menschenrechtskontrolle in Einrichtungen für Menschen mit Behinderungen.

Amtswegiges Prüfverfahren zeigt fehlende Maßnahme der Länder

Die Volksanwaltschaft führte daher ein amtswegiges Prüfverfahren durch, um die Bundesländer zu ihren Maßnahmen zu befragen. Dabei zeigte sich, dass teilweise sogar gesetzlich vorgeschriebene Maßnahmen nicht durchgeführt werden. So fehlen oft Unterstützerkreise, die die Betroffenen so weit wie möglich in die Lage versetzen sollen, ihre Angelegenheiten selbst zu besorgen. Das betrifft alle möglichen Lebensbereiche; bei medizinischen Behandlungen ist ein solcher Unterstützerkreis aber gesetzlich vorgesehen. Erst wenn mithilfe des Unterstützerkreises die Entscheidungsfähigkeit nicht ermöglicht wird, sollte die Erwachsenenvertretung hinzugezogen werden.

Heimvertrag nur mit Erwachsenenvertretung

Das fehlende Bewusstsein hinsichtlich Selbstbestimmung zeigt auch der Umstand, dass viele Einrichtungen für die Aufnahme von Menschen mit Behinderungen eine Erwachsenenvertretung voraussetzen. „Auch aus Alten- und Pflegeheimen wird uns das immer wieder berichtet, auch wenn die Betroffenen zu diesem Zeitpunkt entscheidungsfähig sind. Offenbar wollen es sich manche Betreiber einfach machen und lieber nur den Erwachsenenvertreter fragen, wenn es etwa um medizinische Behandlungen geht – anstatt alle Möglichkeiten der unterstützten Kommunikation zu nützen, um nach dem Willen der Betroffenen selbst zu handeln.“

Um zu zeigen, dass Menschenrechte für Menschen mit Behinderungen in Österreich ernst genommen werden, müssen entsprechende Entwicklungen so rasch wie möglich initiiert werden. „Das erfordert auch die UN-Behindertenrechtskonvention, zu deren Umsetzung sich Österreich verpflichtet hat. Und diese Verpflichtung gilt selbstverständlich auch für die Länder“, so Achitz.

Deputy-Ombudsman Maija Sakslin has issued a decision in a complaint concerning a death that was not notified to the next of kin of the deceased. In the Deputy-Ombudsman’s view, the police did not act appropriately when they did not notify the complainant of the passing away of the complainant's father. The hospital also had an obligation to act in the matter.

The complainant’s father had passed away at the emergency clinic of Satasairaala Hospital in Pori. The hospital did not report the death to the police until seven days later. Because of the delay, the police assumed that the family had already been notified, but did not verify the matter. The complainant had received the information about their father’s death from an external party when more than one month had passed from his death.

Because it was the responsibility of the police to determine the cause of death, the Deputy-Ombudsman considered that the police should have verified whether the notification had been made or taken care of notifying the family themselves. The hospital, on the other hand, was delayed in reporting the death to the police, and the Deputy-Ombudsman found a delay of seven days unreasonable considering the legal requirement that action must be taken without delay. The hospital therefore had a special responsibility to determine whether the deceased had any family and to ensure that the death is notified.

The wellbeing services county of Satakunta and the employees of Satakunta Hospital who submitted a report on the matter have apologised to the complainant. In addition, the wellbeing services county reported in its statement that it has begun corrective measures because of the complaint. The Deputy-Ombudsman therefore considered it a sufficient measure to bring to the attention of the wellbeing services county that she considered their actions erroneous.

Because of the delay in the hospital’s report to the police, the Deputy-Ombudsman found it understandable that the police assumed the next-of-kin had already been notified by the hospital. The Deputy-Ombudsman considered the police statement on the matter positive as it was noted in the statement that the police should in future ensure in cooperation with the hospital that the family of the deceased has been notified of the death, and record this in the notification of the investigation. Based on these, the Deputy-Ombudsman considered that bringing her views to the attention of the Southwestern Finland Police Department was a sufficient measure.
Deputy-Ombudsman Maija Sakslin's decision EOAK/587/2024 has been published on the Parliamentary Ombudsman's website at oikeusasiamies.fi.

Further information is available from Senior Legal Adviser Riitta Burrell, tel. +358 9 432 3342.

Summary of the decision: In the decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsman expresses an opinion on the interpreting of supervised visits to the Swedish Prison and Probation Service’s secure units when the conversation cannot be conducted in a language staff understand. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has no objection to visits being primarily supervised by prison staff with relevant language skills. However, in her opinion, this must not mean that, in practice, approved contact for an inmate of the secure unit who speaks a language other than Swedish with their friends and family is restricted.

Hall Prison’s previous procedure was that it would never employ external interpreters when inmates on the secure unit had visitors. According to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, there were no legal grounds for this procedure and the arrangement clearly meant that an inmate’s right to contact with friends and family was dependent on which language they spoke. She is highly critical of this.

In the case in question, this procedure meant that an inmate was granted visitor permits on a condition that could not be fulfilled. Moreover, it was more than two years until he could receive visits, something that only occurred after the Parliamentary Ombudsman had commenced her review. According to the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the prison is deserving of severe criticism for its processing of the individual’s visits. She also expresses criticism of how the prison dealt with the inmate’s repeated questions concerning how he could go about actually arranging visits from his family.

The Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia (Ombudsman) as a national human rights institution (NHRI) once again participated this year in the preparation of the joint report of the European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI) on the state of the rule of law in the European Union, which contains reports from national human rights institutions from 27 European Union Member States. The report draws attention to serious and long-standing challenges regarding the independence of institutions, freedom of the media, the position of civil society, and the implementation of judgments of the European Courts.

In its national contribution, the Ombudsman highlights several systemic problems that affect the effective protection of human rights and respect for the rule of law. The report, among other things, highlights the challenges regarding the planned changes and amendments to the Human Rights Ombudsman Act. This should strengthen institutional independence, expand powers (e.g. to the areas of disability, trafficking in human beings, the Childrens' Ombudsman, public services), and enable compliance with the United Nations Paris Principles on the Status of National Human Rights Institutions and the recommendations of the Accreditation Committee of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI). The Ombudsman is scheduled to undergo a review of its accreditation status in April next year.

In its current report, the Ombudsman highlights the lack of effective response by state authorities to the Ombudsman's recommendations, especially in the case of structural changes such as deinstitutionalisation, healthcare, or the rights of persons with disabilities. The Ombudsman also noted in the report that in practice it is often not involved in the initial stages of legislation preparation, even when it directly affects the Ombudsman's competence (e.g. the proposal for a new Media Act). The Ombudsman also reiterates the recommendation that institutions and groups directly affected by the proposals be involved in all stages of legislation preparation and that each legislative proposal also includes a human rights impact assessment.

Regarding the violation of the right to a fair trial and an impartial tribunal, the Ombudsman highlights the importance of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of X and Others v. Slovenia (2024), where the court found systemic irregularities in the allocation of court cases and thus a violation of the right to a legally established court, the principle of the natural judge and the right to private and family life due to irregularities in the allocation of court cases. In addition, the Ombudsman calls on the authorities in the report to fully and consistently implement the judgment. In the report, the Ombudsman also specifically highlights the lengthy court proceedings at the Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia. The Ombudsman calls on the authorities to adopt organisational, personnel, and legislative measures to eliminate the backlog in the court and reiterates the recommendation to the courts to conduct the proceedings without undue delays and within the statutory deadlines. The Ombudsman also expresses the expectation for the timely and effective transposition of the EU Directive on the Prevention of Abuse of Judicial Proceedings (SLAPP).

In their report, ENNHRI and the Human Rights Ombudsman recommend, among other things, that the Slovenian authorities:

·        adopt a legal framework to protect human rights defenders and adopt appropriate legislation to combat SLAPP lawsuits.

·        ensure an effective institutional response to the Ombudsman's findings and recommendations, particularly in the areas of health, social services and justice.

·        strengthen respect for media freedom and the legal framework for preventing hate speech in a manner that respects international and European human rights standards.

·        ensure greater involvement of non-governmental organisations, the academic community, and independent institutions in the preparation of action reports and plans for the implementation of judgments of the European courts and ensuring their accessibility.

·        ensure that the Ombudsman be allocated appropriate staff reinforcements and financial resources in the event of an expansion of the Ombudsman's powers.

The ENNHRI report highlights a number of common trends and challenges in EU Member States, including Slovenia. Only 20 Member States have a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) with so-called A-status under the Paris Principles. The report also states that as many as a quarter of national human rights institutions have been the target of threats, discrediting, or attacks in the last year, indicating a decline in respect for independent institutions in Europe. The space for civil society and human rights defenders to operate in the EU also continues to shrink, while protection mechanisms for them in most countries are non-existent or ineffective. The report also finds that media freedom is under pressure in many EU countries, due to threats to journalists, SLAPP lawsuits, political interference in public media, and the spread of disinformation. In an increasing number of EU countries, national institutions perceive slow and incomplete implementation of judgments of European courts, in particular those of the ECHR, which undermines the principles of the rule of law.

The ENNHRI report on the state of the rule of law in the EU and its Member States for 2025 is available in English here, and the Ombudsman's national report on the state of the rule of law in Slovenia is available here.