About this initiative

Summary

With demographic change causing Europe’s population to age, this green paper will seek to launch a wide public debate on this issue.

The green paper will:

• set out the key issues related to ageing
• discuss possible ways to anticipate and respond to the socioeconomic impacts of Europe’s ageing population.

Topic

Economy, finance and the euro, Education and training, Employment and social affairs, Public health, Regional policy, Transport

Type of act

Green Paper

Category

Commission Work Programme

Roadmap

FEEDBACK: OPEN

Type

Roadmap

More about roadmaps

Feedback period

16 November 2020 - 14 December 2020  (midnight Brussels time)

The Commission would like to hear your views.

This roadmap is open for feedback for 4 weeks. Feedback will be taken into account for further development and fine tuning of the initiative. The Commission will summarise the input received in a synopsis report explaining how the input will be taken on board and, if applicable, why certain suggestions can't be taken up. Feedback received will be published on this site and therefore must adhere to the feedback rules.

Give feedback

Roadmap - Ares(2020)6799640

English

(281.8 KB - PDF - 3 pages)

Download  

Déléguée du Défenseur des droits au PIMMS des 4 Moulins à Brest, Anne Mériadec-Le Meur, a apporté son aide à Luc qui avait perdu ses papiers et n’arrivait pas à obtenir un duplicata de son permis de conduire. Elle témoigne :

J’ai reçu à ma permanence Luc, ingénieur à la retraite, désespéré. Il m’a raconté qu’à la suite de la perte de son portefeuille, il faisait refaire tous ses papiers. Mais il n’arrivait pas à obtenir un duplicata de son permis de conduire. L’administration lui répondait qu’il n’y avait aucune trace du permis et qu’il devait donc le repasser. Désemparé, il a choisi de venir me voir dans ma permanence près de chez lui.

Par chance, il avait l’habitude de scanner tous ses documents importants. Je l’ai rassuré en lui disant que nous allions pouvoir prouver qu’il avait bien passé son permis de conduire en 1979, que j’allais pouvoir l’aider, puisque le Défenseur des droits est compétent pour défendre les droits des usagers à l’égard du service public.

J’ai donc contacté la préfecture du département dans lequel il avait passé son permis il y a 41 ans. Grâce au scan que je leur ai transmis, ils ont pu inscrire le permis de Luc au fichier national. Cette régularisation faite, Luc a pu réitérer sa demande sur le site ANTS et obtenir enfin le droit de circuler

Si comme Luc, vous avez des difficultés à faire valoir vos droits auprès d’une administration ou d’un service public, le Défenseur des droits vous aide à mieux comprendre vos droits et vous oriente dans vos démarches. Contactez gratuitement un des délégués territoriaux, proche de chez vous (www.defenseurdesdroits.fr, rubrique saisir).

Retrouvez cette chronique sur Ouest-France.fr.

The Ombudsman Peter Svetina met this week with the Director General of Radiotelevision Slovenia (RTV) Igor Kadunc, Director of the Slovenian Press Agency (STA) Bojan Veselinovič and Director of the Government Communication Office of the Republic of Slovenia (UKOM) Uroš Urbanija. During the meetings they discussed the importance of accessibility to information in a form suitable for vulnerable groups of people. The institution of the Human Rights Ombudsman is often confronted with initiatives proposed by individuals who write that, because of their age or other disabilities – whether they are blind, visually impaired, deaf, hearing-impaired, etc. – they face a variety of issues in accessing information in their everyday lives. Peter Svetina thinks that, in this coronavirus crisis, certain positive steps have been taken in this area, such as real-time interpreting into Slovenian sign language during government press conferences; however, the Ombudsman expects systemic solutions from the government in this respect. He believes that the role and active participation of all three institutions with which he met are of paramount importance.

The Ombudsman stressed that access to information is a fundamental human right. "People with disabilities must be able to enjoy their human rights to the fullest. Access to information and communication technologies is particularly important, as this provides a basis for exercising other rights as well. Through adaptations, people living with impairments can obtain a wide range of information, they can communicate, attend education, integrate into society and participate actively in it. Without adjustments, however, they live on the margins of society and do not have the same opportunities as everyone else,” points out Svetina. He is pleased to see that, since 2018, the Broadcast Access Service has been operating within RTV Slovenia, which administers the portal www.dostopno.si – a radio and television hub using special access technologies – with audio descriptions or subtitles and programmes with an interpreter for Slovenian Sign Language. He said that the role of public service in this area was invaluable; however, his wish is to pay even more attention to distress among hearing-impaired people, which has even increased during the coronavirus pandemic, largely as a result of wearing masks in private and public life. Many of them only read lips and do not know sign language, which makes it difficult for them to communicate and obtain quick access to information.  Most of them acquire information with a temporal delay and in truncated form, which puts these people in a disadvantaged position. This is one of the reasons why the Ombudsman appealed to the managements of RTV, STA and UKOM to ensure the subtitling of their media content, as much as possible and with a minimum of time delay, preferably in real time (for example, press conferences, addresses to citizens, etc.), and to pursue the same principle of publication as available to all other people. "For example, if TV Slovenia broadcasts a certain press conference on its programs, it is to be expected that the same publication with subtitles will be provided as soon as possible," emphasizes Peter Svetina. He added that many of us are unskilled in modern communication technologies, which is why direct publication on RTV Slovenia programmes and not only online is extremely important.

(...)

Deputy-Ombudsman (AOA) Pasi Pölönen has handed down a decision in a matter that he has examined as his own initiative concerning measures targeting people crossing the Finnish border in connection with the temporary restoration of monitoring the internal borders of the European Union.

Several complaints were made to the supreme overseers of legality in the spring and summer of this year concerning actions taken by the Finnish Border Guard especially in the surveillance of Finland's Western border, primarily between Finland and Sweden. Several citizens filed complaints, saying that they had been denied the possibility to cross the border, even though there were no legal justifications for the denials.

The Deputy-Ombudsman has concluded that recommendations and binding orders given to persons wishing to cross the border had become confused on some levels in the early phases of the restoration of monitoring of internal borders.

A binding order or command given by an official to a citizen must always be based on a regulation contained in legislation that provides a legal mandate to do so. If necessary, the citizen must also be informed if a binding order, or simply a recommendation handed down by an official is involved. 

The purpose of government decisions on the restoration of internal border controls, the closure of border crossings, and restrictions on transport has been to reduce cross-border movement to slow the spread of the coronavirus pandemic, thus promoting the basic right of citizens to protection of their lives and health.

Under the Finnish constitution, a Finnish citizen always has the right to enter Finland and to leave Finland. If there were no legal impediments to leaving the country, people intending to cross the border should have been informed that they have the right to cross the border without negative legal consequences and that it is a question of their freedom of choice. In the same situation it would have been possible to advise them that leaving the country was nevertheless not advisable. The overall security of Finnish citizens and the protection of their lives and health was emphasised in the situation at hand, which means that giving recommendations concerning travel as such has been justified.

According to the Deputy-Ombudsman it is nevertheless understandable that it has been challenging to give instructions under exceptional and unexpected conditions, and under heavy pressure on crossing the border that are compatible with both the recommendations and with the constitutional right to leave the country, while keeping in mind the goals and will of the Finnish Government. This is, nevertheless, the procedure that should have been followed. 

In his decision 3257/2020, the Deputy-Ombudsman has examined only the operative activities of the Border Guard and their legality in light of their status as the authority that implements border monitoring connected with the restoration of the supervision of internal borders for a fixed period of time. On 1 October 2020, the Chancellor of Justice handed down a decision on decision-making and measures taken by the Government and its ministries on announcements concerning the coronavirus.

Further information is available from Kristian Holman, Senior Legal Adviser, tel. +358 9 432 3368.

During September 2020, the People’s Advocate institution was notified by several individuals through petitions with similar content, which brought criticism regarding certain measures established by the Joint Order no. 5487/2020 of the Minister of Education and Research, Cristina Monica Anisie, and of the Minister of Health, Nelu Tătaru, for approving the measures for organizing the activity within the educational units / institutions in epidemiological safety conditions for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 virus infections,

Some of the measures referred to by the petitioners were the compulsory wearing of the protective mask by primary, secondary and high school students in classrooms, while traveling through the school and during break between classes (when students are both indoor and outdoor) and, respectively, the mandatory maintenance of a physical distance of 1 meter between students both during classes and during breaks. 

The petitioners considered that these measures have harmful effects on the physical and mental health of their children and affect both the learning process of students, by preventing them from concentrating on classes, and their need to socialize with their schoolmates. 

The notified aspects were analyzed in the context of the provisions of Art. 32 and of Art. 34 of the Romanian Constitution on the right to education and, respectively, the right to health.

In order to support the petitioners, we emphasize the following:

Joint Order no. 5487/2020 regulates the measures regarding the means of prevention and control of infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus that will be applied in the educational units / institutions, in order to ensure the right to education and the right to health, for the primary beneficiaries of the right to education, students and staff in the national education system. 

This joint order was adopted on the basis of Emergency Ordinance no. 141/2020 on the establishment of measures for the proper functioning of the education system and for amending and supplementing the National Education Law no. 1/2011.

According to Annex no. 1A to the Guide on sanitary and protection measures in pre-university education units during the COVID-19 pandemic, annex entitled “Scenarios for the operation of pre-university education units or institutions”, wearing a protective mask and keeping a physical distance of 1 m between students both during classes and during breaks are mandatory for both students and teachers in preschool, primary, secondary and high school.

The Ombudsperson considers that the issues for which the petitioners have requested the support of our institution are legally grounded and useful measures in terms of efforts to combat the COVID-19 pandemic aimed at protecting children, teachers and their families from the risk of infection with the new coronavirus, so that the intervention of the People’s Advocate institution is not required.

Persons who consider that such measures have been affected by their fundamental rights and freedoms may apply to the competent court, which will assess the legality of the provisions of Joint Order no. 5487/2020 issued by the Minister of Education and Research and the Minister of Health.