El Síndic de Greuges de la Comunitat Valenciana, Ángel Luna, ha abierto una queja de oficio con el fin de investigar y supervisar las actuaciones de la Administración en los accidentes sufridos por tres menores este verano en festejos taurinos. Recordamos que esta institución tiene encomendado, especialmente, velar por la defensa de los derechos de la infancia y la adolescencia.

A pesar de que la normativa valenciana prohíbe claramente la participación de menores de 16 años en los espectáculos taurinos tradicionales (bous al carrer), en estos últimos dos meses han tenido lugar en la Comunidad Valenciana tres cogidas por asta de toro de personas menores de 16 años, con graves consecuencias para su integridad física. Y ello, a pesar de las numerosas medidas de seguridad que se establecen en la normativa que regula este tipo de festejos y de la cantidad de agentes implicados en ellas.

Por tanto, en aras a determinar si se ha vulnerado el derecho a la protección de la infancia o a la seguridad y salud de los menores, el Síndic ha solicitado informes a la Conselleria de Justicia e Interior sobre las conclusiones de las investigaciones llevadas a cabo por esa Administración autonómica en cada uno de los festejos taurinos en los que han tenido lugar cogidas a menores de 16 años participantes en el festejo.

Además, solicita un informe acerca del grado de cumplimiento de las medidas de seguridad en cada uno de los festejos, así como de si se ha levantado algún acta por incumplimiento de la normativa de espectáculos.

Igualmente, el Síndic pide una copia de las resoluciones por las que se autorizaba cada uno de los festejos taurinos tradicionales, en las que consten las medidas en materia de seguridad; copia de las comunicaciones efectuadas a los organizadores/directores del festejo; así como de las actas posteriores a la celebración comunicando las incidencias.

Por último, el defensor autonómico también requiere un informe de los respectivos directores de festejos acerca de los hechos acontecidos, y en caso de que no consten en el expediente que se reclame para remitirlo a esta institución.

Los datos emitidos por el Ministerio competente sitúan a la Comunitat Valenciana, año tras año, a la cabeza de las comunidades autónomas que celebran festejos de bous al carrer. El factor «seguridad» es el nexo que fusiona la tradición con la correcta ejecución de la fiesta. Un nexo que desemboca en los dos elementos esenciales para el adecuado desarrollo de la celebración: ser un acontecimiento popular y la exigencia de responsabilidad en su realización.

Sin embargo, el pasado 27/07/2024 un adolescente de 15 años sufrió una cogida durante los festejos taurinos de la localidad valenciana de Meliana. Asimismo, el 7/08/2024, un menor de 13 ó 14 años accedió al recinto acotado de bous al carrer de Simat de la Valldigna, donde sufrió una aparatosa cogida. Y, finalmente, el lunes 19/08/2024, en la localidad de Vilamarxant, un adolescente de 15 años volvió a ser corneado por un toro.

Accede a la resolución de inicio de investigación. 

PRESS RELEASE No 130/24

Luxembourg, 5 September 2024

Judgment of the Court in Case C-603/22 | M.S. and Others (Procedural rights of a child)

Fair trial: minors subject to criminal proceedings must have the practical and effective opportunity to be assisted by a lawyer

Such assistance must be offered at the latest by the time they are first questioned by the police

Criminal proceedings against three minors were brought before a Polish court. They were charged with having broken into the buildings of a disused former holiday centre.

During those proceedings, it was found that the suspects had been questioned by the police in the absence of a lawyer. Before they were first questioned, neither they nor their parents had been informed of their rights or the conduct of the proceedings. The court-appointed lawyers therefore requested that previous statements made by the suspects be removed from the file as evidence.

The national court, questioning the effectiveness of the procedural guarantees in place for minors during the pretrial phase, made a reference to the Court of Justice. (...)

Almost half a million pounds in compensation has been secured following investigations by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) for people wrongly denied payment by the Windrush Compensation Scheme. 

The Ombudsman found that the Scheme, set up by the Home Office in response to the Windrush scandal, is making wrong decisions and refusing payment to those who are entitled to it. 

By publishing its findings in a new report, ‘Spotlight on the Windrush Compensation Scheme’, PHSO is hopeful that this will present an opportunity for the Home Office to review and make improvements to the current mechanisms in place for compensating people affected by Windrush. 

The report reveals why the Scheme is making wrong decisions. 

These are: 

• telling people they were not eligible for compensation by wrongly applying their own rules 
• not always looking at all the evidence provided 
• applying the rules even when they led to unfair outcomes for some people. It is likely that the unfairness of some of the rules may have affected more people than the cases we have seen. 

Since 2021 the Ombudsman has received 46 complaints about the Compensation Scheme and has asked it to look again at nine of those. Some of those are still under review, but so far PHSO has helped individuals who complained about their treatment to secure a total of £432,592.

Rebecca Hilsenrath, Parliamentary Ombudsman, said:

“The Windrush Compensation Scheme was set up to right the wrongs of a scandal that inflicted harm on very many people. But our evidence shows that further harm and injustice are still being caused by failings in the way the Scheme is working. 

“Our report found people who had applied for compensation were being wrongly denied the money they were owed. We found recurrent reasons for this, suggesting these were not one-off issues but systemic problems.

“The people who brought their complaints to us have helped to shine a light on some unwelcome realities. By listening to them and working together with the Scheme – which has been open to reconsidering the issues we have raised - we have helped many people secure financial remedy. Our intervention has also resulted in wider changes which have the potential to positively affect applicants seeking reparation.

“We hope that the issues raised in this report will help to inform the approach the Home Office applies when managing sensitive issues in future. We also hope that further improvements are made to the Scheme to support the Windrush generation and their families. There could also be lessons for the Government to learn in how it approaches other compensation schemes, for example on the Post Office Horizon scandal, the Infected Blood Inquiry, and the maladministration in relation to women’s state pension age.” 

Rachelle Romeo’s father Auckland Elwaldo Romeo came to the UK from Antigua as a child in 1959. After his passport was stolen, he applied for a new one in 2005 but was told he was never on record as living in the UK. 

Rachelle, 40, a mother-of-three from Enfield, supported her father through the ‘frightening’ and ‘stressful’ process of proving his right to live in the UK, which took 13 years. She applied to the Compensation Scheme for restitution for the toll this had taken on her mental health and ability to work and was awarded £20,000. 

However, the Ombudsman saw that the Scheme had not considered all the evidence about the impact the process of proving her father’s right to live in the UK had on her. For example, they did not speak to her GP or counsellor or properly consider witness statements from colleagues about the impact on her mental health. After the Ombudsman asked the Scheme to reconsider, the offer was increased to £70,000, which Rachelle is currently challenging. 

Rachelle said:

 “Fighting for my father’s right to stay in the UK was incredibly stressful. It was dragged out for 13 years while they made us go from pillar to post to find information and threatened to deport my father after almost 60 years of living here. It broke my resilience. I was unable to work for several months and I’m still on medication for anxiety six years after this was resolved. 

“When I went to the Windrush Compensation Scheme I felt as if they disregarded what I went through. It seemed like they didn’t want to acknowledge what had happened and all the onus was on me to tell them where to look for evidence. This was at a time when my mental health had crashed and I was constantly in fight mode. 

“Their initial offer was insulting for 13 years of my family being ripped apart. How can I heal when even six years after my dad’s passport was issued, I still feel like I have to prove to them how awful that experience was? I haven’t had closure, and that is an extension of the pain they initially put us through.” 

The aim of the report is to encourage people to complain if they have had a bad experience when applying for compensation through the Scheme.  

Rebecca Hilsenrath added:

 “Given the number of people affected by the Windrush scandal, there may be many others who are unhappy with their experience with the Windrush Compensation Scheme. I encourage anyone who has a concern to bring their complaint to us. We’re completely independent, free, open to anyone who doesn’t feel their voice has been heard and we’re focused on fairness. If you feel you have been let down, we want to help by getting to the truth.” 

Read the full report.

Ealing council wrongly turned away a pregnant woman who approached it for help with housing, despite police and other agencies saying it was not safe for her to return to her tenancy in another area.

The woman had suffered domestic abuse and harassment at the hands of her former partner, and was sofa-surfing with family in Ealing, when she approached the council for help.

But despite having family support in the area, and the fact the police, her midwife and an independent domestic violence advisor raised concerns about the risk to the woman and her unborn child, the council decided she did not meet its criteria for help.

The council decided there were ‘no special circumstances’ to exempt her from meeting its local residency criteria to enable her to join the housing register.

The woman appealed the council’s decision, but it remained firm that it was correct.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman was asked to investigate. It found the council used an outdated, narrow definition of domestic abuse, limiting it to physical attacks. This is contrary to the legal definition that includes non-physical abuse, including psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour, which came into force in 2021.

The Ombudsman also found the council disregarded information that the ex-partner had kicked in the woman’s door, because the police took no further action to prosecute the partner. Instead of relying on the lower ‘balance of probabilities’ standard of proof it should do when making decisions, the council instead applied the higher ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard of proof used in a legal criminal case, which was completely wrong.

Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, Ms Amerdeep Somal said:

“This case demonstrates a clear lack of understanding within the council’s housing department of what constitutes domestic abuse, as defined by law. The idea that domestic abuse is limited to physical violence is outdated. This lack of knowledge could potentially have affected other vulnerable people in the council’s area.

“It failed to even investigate whether it owed her a duty to house her, or to offer her interim accommodation. Instead, it left a pregnant woman to sofa-surf with family.

“This woman had the additional distress and indignity of giving birth not knowing where she and her baby would live.

“I hope the measures the council has agreed to put in place will ensure other vulnerable people who have suffered domestic abuse do not have their experiences discounted in future.”

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman remedies injustice and shares learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council has agreed to apologise to the woman, review her homelessness status, and review her application to its housing register. It will also pay her £1,000 to recognise the significant distress she endured.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the council will provide training and guidance on domestic abuse to those staff involved in the homelessness and housing process.

Article date: 05 September 2024

The Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon, joined Tonio Bonello on Radju Malta’s “Il-Polz taċ-Ċittadin” to discuss the role and activities of the Ombudsman’s office. During the session, listeners had the opportunity to engage directly, asking questions and sharing their concerns.

The Ombudsman began by explaining the role of the Office of the Ombudsman, established in 1995 to safeguard people’s rights against maladministration. Despite the office’s long-standing presence, there remains a need to increase awareness, especially among younger demographics. The Ombudsman highlighted his efforts to reach out through various media channels, emphasising the need for greater engagement to better inform the public about their rights and the office’s functions.

Addressing the effectiveness of the office, the Ombudsman noted that while 70% of his recommendations have been implemented, the office continues to work hard to persuade the government to adopt all its recommendations in the public’s best interest.

Other topics discussed included the need for a National Human Rights Institution in Malta, the importance of continued collaboration with public administration, and ongoing efforts to uphold peoples’ rights.