The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman is today launching a new guide to help local authorities handle complaints under the children’s services statutory complaints process.

Free to download, the short guide shares the lessons from previous investigations about how councils should apply the regulations and statutory guidance. Being the area in which the Ombudsman receives the most queries from local authorities, it addresses the common questions received.

For complaints about many areas of children’s services, there is a statutory, three-stage complaints procedure local authorities must follow. Common questions answered in the guide include basic issues around what areas come under the statutory process along with more detailed questions about young people’s consent, court action, delays and deadlines, and statements of complaint.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said:

“We have published this guide to help local authorities navigate the process, and avoid some of the pitfalls we have seen in previous investigations. It is not uncommon for us to find issues with complaint handling when we investigate cases about children’s services – and we receive many questions from councils about how to follow the process.

“Our answer is the statutory complaints process is set out in law so we expect councils to follow the guidance and regulations as they stand, and will hold them to account should they not do so.

“Where they have concerns about the effectiveness of the statutory process, councils have an opportunity to raise those in the Government’s review of children’s services – something which we intend to contribute to.”

Article date: 18 March 2021

Link: A Member State court is required to exercise the power conferred on it by national law to make a declaration that that Member State has failed correctly to transpose a directive and is required to take remedial steps in that regard (europa.eu)

Languages: bg es cs da de et el en fr hr ga it lv lt hu mt nl pl pt ro sk sl fi sv

Court of Justice of the European Union

PRESS RELEASE No 42/21

Luxembourg, 17 March 2021

Judgment in Case C-64/20 UH v An tAire Talmhaíochta Bia agus Mara, Éire and An tArd-Aighne

A Member State court is required to exercise the power conferred on it by national law to make a declaration that that Member State has failed correctly to transpose a directive and is required to take remedial steps in that regard

That court cannot disregard the obligation imposed on that Member State to transpose a directive on the ground that that transposition is purportedly disproportionate as a result of forthcoming changes in the requirements arising from EU law

UH, an Irish citizen and a native Irish speaker from the Galway Gaeltacht (the Irish-speaking region of Co. Galway, Ireland), claimed that the information accompanying veterinary medicinal products was written exclusively in the English language. He takes the view that Directive 2001/82 1 requires that information to be in both of the official languages of Ireland, namely Irish and English. On 14 November 2016, UH requested that the Ard-Chúirt (High Court, Ireland) make a declaration that Directive 2001/82 was incorrectly transposed and that Ireland was under an obligation to amend its legislation accordingly. 

(...)

Stampa: Il Desk. Preso dal Facebook del Dinfesore civico della Regione Campania

Denuncia del difensore civico, la polizia acquisisce carte su delega del pm. Fortunato: “È ora di finirla con questi metodi a danni di chi ha l’abilitazione”. Contratti annullati in autotutela dall’ente

“È l’ora di finirla con questi metodi ai danni di tanti professionisti e funzionari muniti di abilitazione”. Assunti all’ufficio legale senza concorso, il Difensore Civico, Giuseppe Fortunato, annuncia una svolta nella vicenda. Fortunato aveva invitato la Regione Campania a rispettare le leggi: “Non si può entrare come Avvocato in Regione Campania senza concorso. Oltre a una dottoressa, come giustamente segnalatomi, anche altri due  funzionari hanno avuto questa nomina di avvocato: un canale di malcostume con sistemi da tribù feudali”.  A seguito della denuncia del Difensore Civico, la Procura della Repubblica ha aperto un’indagine. A quanto risulta, due Ispettori di polizia, delegati dal pm, si sono recati in Regione, ad acquisire documenti. Nel frattempo, Fortunato segnala che la l’ente di Santa Lucia, in autotutela, ha annullato il contratto sottoscritto con una dei funzionari al centro della storia. La professionista, in passato, era in organico all’Arcadis, agenzia regionale per la difesa del suolo, posta in liquidazione. Prima di essere trasferita all’ufficio legale della Regione, era stata distaccata negli uffici della giunta. Oltre al suo caso, sono stati “identificati i due misteriosi altri funzionari, anch’essi ex Arcadis – afferma Fortunato -, nominati illegittimamente avvocati della Regione Campania. Anche per essi il contratto è stato dichiarato nullo”. Il Difensore Civico è perentorio: “È come se un impiegato con abilitazione medica venisse nominato medico dell’Asl invece di indire i concorsi. Se c’è necessità, selezionare i migliori senza favoritismi e oscure manovre”.

Gianmaria Robe

Involuntary hospitalized persons with mental and behavioral disorders from now on will be able to take advantage of an independent assessment of their state of mental health. Such a possibility is provided for in the Minister of Health’s procedure, which was approved taking into account the recommendations of the Seimas Ombudsman Augustinas Normantas.

Mr. Normantas did not hide the fact that the implementation of this recommendation required a great deal of perseverance, but is pleased that the finally adopted legislation will enable people to be  involuntary hospitalized to see the need for such hospitalization, as additional findings will be provided by three psychiatrists.

“This Description of the Additional Mental Health Assessment Procedure is like a small breakthrough in mental health care. We have been calling on the institutions responsible for these changes since 2018, when the Law on Mental Health Care of the Republic of Lithuania was amended. On each occasion, we have consistently reminded of the importance of enabling a person in involuntary hospitalization, whose consent is not respected, to re-examine the proportionality of the decision initiated by listening to the opinion of independent psychiatrists. We can be pleased that today such a procedure is finally provided for,” pointed out the Seimas Ombudsman.

The Seimas Ombudsman notes that in assessing the country’s involuntary hospitalization procedure, he repeatedly emphasized the importance of the opinion of a psychiatrist independent of the institution that initiated the involuntary hospitalization procedure regarding the person under consideration for involuntary hospitalization. As a significant problem the Seimas Ombudsman identifies the fact that judges until now are not obliged to apply for an alternative opinion, asking to assess the need for involuntary hospitalization of a person.

“We called for the improvement of the Law on Mental Health Care, including the establishment of a procedure for the independent assessment of person’s state of mental health, so that the situation of vulnerable persons is not abused, their rights are guaranteed and appropriate mental health care is provided. Our aim is to achieve that courts would go beyond a formal assessment of documents submitted by a psychiatric institution. It is crucial that individuals to be involuntary hospitalized would have an additional opportunity to seek the views of independent psychiatrists. From now on, an additional assessment of the state of mental health will be performed by as many as three psychiatrists,” notes the Seimas Ombudsman, adding that this need was also highlighted by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities when providing recommendations to Lithuania.

The Seimas Ombudsman is pleased that currently the Ministry of Health has approved the Description of the Additional Mental Health Assessment Procedure, which regulates the procedure for organizing and conducting the mental health assessment of involuntary hospitalized or involuntary treated patient of mental and behavioral disorders. Moreover, the individuals performing additional mental health assessment and the requirements imposed on them have also been identified.

The Seimas Ombudsmen protect a person‘s right to good public administration, securing human rights and freedoms, and supervise fulfilment by state authorities of their duty to properly serve the people. The Seimas Ombudsmen also conduct national prevention of torture in places of deprivation of liberty in accordance with the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Seimas Ombudsmen’s Office is a national human rights institution accredited with an „A status“ by the United Nations.

Relationship between citizen and government: trust is essential

The citizen is increasingly affected by the government’s use of data and algorithms. That use is not always evident and transparent. Nevertheless, it does affect the trust and confidence that the general public has in public sector authorities.

That people should be able to trust government processes is one of the fundamental tenets of our constitutional state. Trust demands more than just legal and ethical safeguards; it calls for a balanced relationship between the citizen and the government. That relationship becomes even more important in today’s ‘data society’.

Given the complexity of modern technology, the mechanisms underlying some government processes are becoming less transparent. They are, as it were, disappearing into a black box. At the same time, the volume of information about citizens which is collected, stored, processed and shared by government agencies is increasing. Put simply, the government knows far more about the individual. It is therefore important that, in addition to legal and ethical safeguards, our data society is subject to standards and values that are endorsed and observed by all. It falls to the government to apply these standards and values within everyday practice. This is particularly important if it is to foster and maintain the citizen’s trust in its use of data and algorithms.

Clarity, accessibility and a solution-oriented approach

The government is responsible for its use of data and algorithms. (For the sake of simplicity, we use the term ‘the government’ to apply to all public sector authorities.) It must make all decisions relating to the use, development and application of data technology in a planned and conscientious manner. It falls to the government to ensure the quality of data-processing hardware and software, as well as the lawful and ethical use of data and algorithms. The government is responsible for all aspects of the development of the models and for their use.

This is an ongoing process which demands active input from all government agencies. Moreover, the experiences of the citizen, as well as the citizen’s own wishes and requirements, should play a crucial role throughout the cycle of development, application and the use of output. Again, it is the government’s responsibility to ensure that the citizen’s perspective is placed to the fore, that there can be meaningful human contact, and that there remains opportunity for individualised ‘bespoke’ solutions where circumstances warrant. In the National Ombudsman’s view, the government will fulfil its responsibility by observing three key principles: clarity, accessibility and a solution-oriented approach. These principles are discussed and further elaborated in this document.

Ombudsman’s vision of appropriate use of data and algorithms by government
 

Offer clarity

• by identifying all use of data and algorithms, and the purpose of such use
• by determining in advance who will be involved in the processes, when and how
• by proactively offering clear information about the use of data and algorithms
• by observing legal (legislative) and ethical frameworks whereby responsibilities are duly assigned.

Be accessible

• by knowing which individual the data relates to, and ensuring that he or she is able to make contact
• by involving citizens to the greatest extent possible
• by accepting and responding to questions or complaints about (the use of) data and algorithms
• by ensuring consistency and cooperation, i.e. acting as a unified government.           

Focus on solutions

• by determining beforehand the purposes for which data and algorithms will – and will not – be used
• by incorporating an ‘emergency brake’ mechanism
• by ensuring opportunity for discretion, individualisation and personal contact
• by maintaining an ongoing dialogue and by learning from any mistakes made.

Download dit onderzoek(pdf, 417.71 KB)