.

Ombudsman Peter Tyndall has today published a commentary on his Office’s experience of dealing with complaints from refugees and asylum seekers living in direct provision centres.  In ‘The Ombudsman & Direct Provision – The story so far’, the Ombudsman says that sometimes residents are reluctant to complain and some complaints arise as a result of cultural differences.  As a result the Ombudsman’s office has worked with the Reception and Integration Agency, and residents and managers in 35 centres around the country to seek to improve services.

In April last year the remit of the Ombudsman and Ombudsman for Children to examine complaints from asylum seekers living in direct provision centres was confirmed.

The Ombudsman received 97 formal complaints from residents in 2017.  The complaints included those about transfers between direct provision centres, as well as the quality of food and standard of accommodation at the centres.  Residents also complained about the refusal of travel expenses to attend medical or solicitor’s appointments, the attitudes of some centre staff and communication regarding deportation orders.

The Ombudsman said:

“We have found that the most effective way to deal with complaints is to meet with residents and centre managers to discuss the issues being raised.  This has resulted in many complaints being resolved on the spot.”

The Commentary can be read at this link

END

Note for Editors: Direct Provision is the State system for meeting the basic needs of food and shelter for asylum seekers directly while their claims for refugee status are being processed. Asylum seekers receive full board accommodation and personal allowances of €21.60 per adult and €21.60 euro per child per week.

The Ombudsman was on RTÉ Radio 1’s Morning Ireland to discuss The Ombudsman & Direct Provision: The story so far.
 

The institution considers that there are obvious reasons for the European Court of Human Rights to intervene

It also recommends to the Parliament of Catalonia to file an appeal against the requirement to request judicial authorization to attend the presidential inauguration

The Catalan Ombudsman considers to be serious the possible alteration of the current legal framework and a violation of the rule of law by means of the the ruling of the Spanish Constitutional Court on January 27^th. In this decision, the Spanish High Court unanimously agrees the precautionary suspension of the resolutions of the President and the Bureau of the Parliament of Catalonia, which proposes the inauguration of Carles Puigdemont as a candidate for the Presidency of the Government of Catalonia.

The Spanish Constitutional Court, without admitting to the request of the Spanish State Government, has adopted unsolicited precautionary measures, which are not provided for in the Spanish Constitution, nor in its organic law, and in a procedure (challenge of autonomous provisions) that it does not provide for it. These precautionary measures have a direct impact on the rights of a deputy elected (MP) in the last elections of December 21^st, the right of popular representation of the Parliament, and also, in general, the rights of political participation of all the citizens of Catalonia, and these were adopted without listening to the parties in the procedure.

In fact, the ruling of the Spanish Constitutional Court demands a condition for the candidate for the presidency of the Catalan Government (request a judicial authorization) unknown in the legal system in force and that, as a condition that is overdue to be invested, violates his rights as a Member of Parliament and is contrary to the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). In this regard, in addition, all the citizens of Catalonia, regardless of of their vote on December 21, are prevented from the right of political participation by active suffrage. On the other hand, the repeated prohibition of MPs who are deprived of freedom to participate in parliamentary tasks −except with regards to their vote, which can be delegated− also supposes a violation of the right of passive suffrage of these MPs.

The Catalan Ombudsman considers that there are well-founded reasons for people directly injured in their rights to bring their corresponding demands before the ECtHR, which could request, if necessary, precautionary measures under article 39 of the Regulations of the same ECtHR. The Catalan Ombudsman recommends that the Parliament of Catalonia submits a petition against the Spanish Constitutional Court’s request to the candidate to request prior authorization to be eligible for the investiture, besides the allegations that may be made on admission to procedure for the request of the Government of the State.

Likewise, the Catalan Ombudsman will send this statement to the European Commissioner for Human Rights and other international bodies for their knowledge and consideration.