The Case

A Major in the Armed Forces of Malta (AFM) lodged a complaint after he was not promoted to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel despite meeting the eligibility criteria. He claimed the selection process for the promotion was flawed and that he suffered an injustice as a result.

The Investigation

The investigation examined the selection process used for promotions from Major to Lieutenant Colonel within the AFM. The promotion process involved candidates submitting an expression of interest, followed by interviews. The selection was based on the Senior Ranks Appointments Advisory Committee (SRAAC) report, which recommended the top candidates to the Minister for approval. The complainant, who was not among the top-ranked candidates, sought information on his ranking and interview performance but was dissatisfied with the responses and explanations provided by the Commander of the AFM.

Facts and Findings

• The promotion process for 2016 deviated from the more objective processes used in 2011, where written and oral examinations were part of the selection criteria. The 2016 process relied solely on interviews, with no written tests or clear records of interview questions, leading to a less transparent and more subjective evaluation.
• The SRAAC assessed candidates based on seniority, efficiency, and the ability to fill a vacancy. However, there was no clear documentation of how these criteria were applied or how scores were awarded.
• The Ombudsman found that the elimination of written assessments and the lack of a standardised interview process in 2016 increased subjectivity and undermined the fairness of the promotion process.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The Ombudsman concluded that the complainant suffered an injustice due to the lack of objectivity in the selection process. The promotion procedure failed to adhere to the transparent and merit-based standards previously established in 2011. While the Ombudsman recognised the injustice, no rectification could be recommended because there was no assurance that the complainant would have been promoted even if the process had been fairer.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Armed Forces of Malta revise its promotion selection process, advocating a return to the more objective criteria used in 2011, which included written assessments and clear, documented interview procedures to ensure fairness, transparency, and meritocracy in future promotions.

Following complaints received from citizens and professional organizations who express their concern about a list of teachers circulated via social media posts, containing insults and threats of harassment, the Ombudsman Institution expresses the following position:

Social media posts utilising a list of names and workplaces of individuals who publicly maintain a civic stance on important public issues, whilst calling for lynching and a crackdown on these individuals, directly infringe upon fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria as well as by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU Charter) and other international human rights instruments, namely:

• The very preamble of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria elevates as higher principles the rights of the individual, their dignity and security;
• Article 39(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria guarantees the right of every Bulgarian citizen to express and disseminate their opinion through speech;
• Article 45 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria guarantees the right of citizens to lodge complaints, proposals and petitions with State authorities;
• Article 10 of the ECHR guarantees the right of every citizen to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions, as well as to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authorities;
• Article 1 of the EU Charter proclaims that human dignity is inviolable and must be respected and protected by public authorities in all cases and by all means.
• Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is in the same spirit.

We would like to underline that the right under Article 39 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria may not be used to prejudice the rights and reputation of others, or to incite enmity or violence against anyone.

In all their actions, public authorities, official institutions and organisations shall respect and guarantee human dignity, the right to freely express one's civic position and to defend one's personal opinion, especially with regard to issues of public importance. Moreover, this is owed to educational professionals, as expressly provided for in Article 219(3) of the Pre-school and School Education Act - 'teaching professionals are to be held in respect and high regard by pupils, parents, administrative authorities and the public'.

Respect for human dignity, freedom of expression and equality before the law form the foundation of any state governed by the rule of law and the building of a just democratic society.

Any action that creates conditions for stigmatisation of a group of people, persecution, division and hatred in a society contravenes all international human rights standards, which the Republic of Bulgaria has committed to guaranteeing for its citizens as a state governed by the rule of law.

The complaint

The complainant had been detailed by the Ministry for Education to work at the Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology (MCAST). Upon reaching retirement age, he sought pre-retirement leave from MCAST, but this was turned down. He alleged that his request had been rejected for no valid reason.

The investigation and findings

After examining all the evidence, the Commissioner for Education noted that after his initial detailing with MCAST the complainant had become subject to two sets of regulations, not in themselves contradictory, but with independent time-frames and conditions depending upon the matter in issue.

The complainant’s contract of service with the College dating back to 2002, as subsequently renewed and finally extended beyond his 64th birthday up to August of 2023, with its various amendments and appendices, regulated primarily his responsibilities and remuneration as a member of the lecturing staff of the College. However, for purposes of pension and pre-retirement leave, the rules applicable to the civil service continued to apply to the complainant. In fact, the relative MCAST collective Agreement did not even contemplate pre-retirement leave.

As the term itself – pre-retirement – clearly indicated, this leave is intended to be availed of before someone actually retires. It cannot be converted into post-retirement leave. Since the complainant was due to retire very early in 2023, he could have applied for such leave before his retirement date and before requesting an extension of his detailing to MCAST. In that case, after August 2022 he would have reverted to his substantive grade in the civil service and benefitted from three months fully paid leave in the run-up to his 64th birthday early in January 2023. Since, as the Commissioner was informed, the complainant had hardly ever made use of his sick leave entitlement, he would in all probability have been granted the full pre-retirement leave. However, the complainant opted to continue to provide a service to the College. By extending his services to MCAST, he forfeited his right to the pre-retirement leave under the rules governing the civil service. The Commissioner also expressed his view that in light of the complainant’s impeccable track record as a lecturer at MCAST, had he requested further extensions as a lecturer there, his request would have been acceded to.

Conclusion

In sum, the Commissioner for Education concluded that there was no evidence of any maladministration in the sense of Article 22(1)(2) of the Ombudsman Act. There may have been some misunderstanding – on the part of the complainant, or on the part of the MCAST administration, or on both – as to the modalities and conditions with which pre-retirement leave was to be availed of in the civil service, but in any case, this did not amount to maladministration.

The complaint, therefore, could not be entertained.

„Die Zustände in Österreichs Haftanstalten sind katastrophal“, kritisiert die zuständige Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz und fordert Justizministerin Alma Zadic einmal mehr zum Handeln auf. Hohe Belegzahlen und zu wenig Personal gehören zu den prekären Bedingungen, die von Insassen wie auch von der Volksanwaltschaft bei Sprechtagen beobachtet werden. Die Folge sind schlechte Versorgungsbedingungen, erschwerte Resozialisierung und sogar steigende Suizidzahlen. Darum spricht sich Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz für die Ausweitung des elektronisch überwachten Hausarrestes auf 18-24 Monate aus: „Diese Maßnahme, die auch vom Rechnungshof empfohlen wird, würde eine rasche Entlastung herbeiführen, ist kostensparend und wäre auch förderlich für die Resozialisierung. Angeblich gibt es einen Entwurf des Justizministeriums, doch der ist noch nicht mal in Regierungsabstimmung. Ich frage mich, warum Justizministerin Zadic völlig tatenlos ist.“

Dass die Planstellen in Justizanstalten erhöht wurden, lässt die Volksanwältin nicht gelten. „Das bringt nichts, wenn laufend Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeiter aufhören und die Posten nicht besetzt werden können. Planstellen zu erhöhen ist nett, aber höchstens ein Symptom und kein Therapieplan. Tatsache ist, dass das Justizpersonal unter Überbelastung leidet, zudem droht eine Pensionierungswelle. Hier muss rasch etwas passieren. Denn der eklatante Personalmangel hat sowohl für die Justizangestellten als auch für die Insassen negative Auswirkungen auf das Klima im Vollzug“, so Gaby Schwarz und führt die schlechte Bezahlung als einen der Gründe an. „Wenn der Personalschlüssel nicht stimmt, können die Insassen nicht entsprechend betreut werden. Notwendige Therapien sind unmöglich, nur eine Stunde Hofgang ist keine Seltenheit. Das ist ein Zustand, der nicht zu tolerieren ist.“

Die Volksanwaltschaft hat in ihrem jährlichen Bericht 48 Empfehlungen an das Justizministerium gerichtet. „Bis jetzt wurde wenig umgesetzt. Als Volksanwaltschaft sind wir auch für die Einhaltung der Menschenrechte zuständig. Dass in Österreichs Gefängnissen derart menschenunwürdige Bedingungen herrschen, ist nicht tragbar. Auch wenn die Nationalratswahl schon vor der Tür steht, appelliere ich an die Justizministerin im Sinne des Justizpersonals und der Resozialisierung von Insassen rasch in die Gänge zu kommen und noch zügig Verbesserungen umzusetzen“, fordert Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz.