June 11, 2024

In a special session presided over by the Speaker of the House, the Hon. Anglu Farrugia, the House Business Committee discussed the Ombudsplan for 2024. The Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon, presented the key topics outlined in this year’s report.

The Ombudsman proposed that Parliament discuss the reports sent when recommendations are not implemented. This echoes the Speaker’s call during the commemoration of the Sette Giugno events for a mechanism to address these within a parliamentary committee. He stressed the public’s demand for fairness and accountability in Government, urging collaboration between the public administration and the Office to promptly resolve complaints.

He explained that the Office of the Ombudsman, distinct from the Courts of Justice, does not deliver judgements but oversees the operations of the public authorities and makes recommendations. The Ombudsman asserted that recommendations result from meticulous fact-finding, which should encourage the government to implement these recommendations.

He highlighted the role of the Ombudsman and Commissioners as agents of change, capable of influencing policy and legislation. The Office is committed to listening to and assisting both the public and the public administration. He mentioned that the institution has a good working relationship with the public administration and emphasised that he will strive to improve it.

A proposal was made to transpose the right to good administration and the principles of good governance from Article 41 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights into Maltese law, possibly into the Constitution. This includes the right of every person to be heard before any individual measure that would adversely affect them is taken. The Ombudsman also noted that Protocol No. 12 of the ECHR, ratified by Malta, has not been incorporated into domestic law, urging immediate government remedial action.

The Ombudsplan 2024 proposes suspending the six-month limitation period for judicial review of administrative actions while a complaint is under investigation. Additionally, the Ombudsman suggested expanding his remit to cover human rights protection, advocating for the establishment of a National Human Rights Institution in Malta.

The session concluded with the House Business Committee recommending that the budget for the Office of the Ombudsman be approved by the Plenary Session.

Chancellor of Justice Tuomas Pöysti hosted a two-day meeting of the Baltic and Nordic Ombuds and Chancellors of Justice during 10.-11.6.2024. The meeting is held annually while the meeting venue varies. This time, the main theme of the meeting was cooperation between the media and oversight of legality from the perspective of the Ombuds institutions. The topics discussed covered issues such as the media as a source of information for oversight of legality and media cooperation in relation to effective targeting of oversight.

In the meeting, experiences were shared for mutual benefit and topical issues related to the oversight of legality were discussed. In addition to the main theme, the topics of discussion included hybrid operations in asylum procedures and the role of overseers of legality in managing the situation. The meeting also discussed the relationship and cooperation between the Ombuds institution and Parliament and the protection of persons participating in public debate against unfounded actions (aka. SLAPP actions).

Der 19-jährige Marko J. hat eine seltene neurologische Krankheit, die ihn schubweise viele Fähigkeiten verlieren lässt. Wegen einer Corona-Infektion war er lange im Spital, im Herbst 2022 sollte er in häusliche Intensivpflege entlassen werden. Er muss beatmet und über eine Sonde ernährt werden. Damit er nicht erstickt, muss er rund um die Uhr von diplomierten Pflegerinnen bzw. Pflegern überwacht und betreut werden. „Ein klarer Fall, dass dafür die Krankenkasse zuständig ist, dazu gibt es Höchstgerichtsurteile. Aber die ÖGK drückt sich wieder einmal um ihre Verpflichtungen herum“, kritisiert Volksanwalt Bernhard Achitz, der das Thema auch immer wieder in die ORF-Sendung „Bürgeranwalt“ brachte, zuletzt am 8. Juni. Auch im Nationalrat wird er die Abgeordneten auf den massiven Handlungsbedarf hinweisen.

Nach mehrmonatigem Krankenhausaufenthalt sollte Marko J. im Herbst 2022 aus dem Krankenhaus entlassen werden. Die Klinik Favoriten verordnete eine ganztägige häusliche Intensivpflege. Die ÖGK schien sich jedoch nicht weiter damit befassen zu wollen und retournierte den Verordnungsschein kommentarlos.

OGH hat festgestellt, dass Intensivpflege von Beatmungspflichtigen Krankenbehandlung ist

Genau genommen sollte die ÖGK die 24-Stunden-Intensivpflege als Sachleistung zur Verfügung stellen, sprich: geeignete Pflegerinnen bzw. Pfleger schicken. Da sie aber dafür keinen Vertragspartner hat, gibt es laut Satzung einen finanziellen Zuschuss. „Der Stundensatz deckt aber bei weitem nicht die Kosten für eine Stunde Pflege ab“, sagt Achitz: „Statt die Unterstützung wenigstens für 24 Stunden auszuzahlen, hat die ÖGK nach dem Einschreiten der Volksanwaltschaft jetzt zehn Stunden angeboten. Ich sehe nicht ein, dass mit den betroffenen Familien gefeilscht wird wie auf dem Flohmarkt, denn der OGH hat eindeutig entschieden, dass die Intensivpflege von Beatmungspflichtigen als Krankenbehandlung anzusehen ist, und dass daher die Krankenkasse zahlen muss.“

Marko J. konnte im Februar 2023 aus dem Krankenhaus entlassen werden – aber nur, weil der Fonds Soziales Wien (FSW) zusicherte, vorübergehend die gesamten Kosten zu übernehmen, für die eigentlich die ÖGK zuständig ist. Marko J. bzw. sein Vater wurden aber aufgefordert, bei der ÖGK einen klagbaren Bescheid einzufordern und vor Gericht zu gehen.

Die Volksanwaltschaft fordert für alle Fälle, in denen sich Krankenkassen und Länder uneinig sind, wer zuständig ist, das Prinzip „Erst zahlen, dann die Kosten aufteilen. Die betroffenen Menschen und ihre Familien sollen nicht auch noch mit endlosen Behördenwegen sekkiert werden. Kassen und Länder sollen erst einmal die Leistung zur Verfügung stellen und sich dann im Hintergrund ausmachen, wie sie die Kosten untereinander aufteilen“, so Volksanwalt Achitz.

In September 2023, the Health and Social Care Inspectorate was criticised by the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman for the slow processing of requests for access to official documents.

In this decision, the  Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman directs renewed criticism at the Health and Social Care Inspectorate for not processing such requests with the promptness that is required under the Freedom of the Press Act. The processing times have been approximately two to six weeks.  The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman states that the Health and Social Care Inspectorate has not come close to meeting the promptness requirement and emphasises that an authority must ensure that the principle of public access to official documents is implemented. He stresses the importance of the continuation of the authority’s work to reduce processing times and intends to monitor developments in this area.

In November 2023, the Parliamentary Ombudsman was on a monitoring visit to Return Centre Kærshovedgård to investigate conditions for persons with tolerated residence status who are required to reside at the return centre. The monitoring visit followed up on a similar monitoring visit in 2017 to Kærshovedgård and a monitoring visit in 2014 to Center Sandholm, which at the time accommodated persons with tolerated residence status.

As with the previous visits, the Ombudsman finds that the general conditions at Kærshovedgård are not in violation of the prohibition against torture and inhuman or degrading treatment in the UN Convention against Torture and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

However, at the monitoring visit in the autumn of 2023, the Ombudsman also found that conditions for residents with tolerated residence status at the return centre must still be viewed as very burdensome and restrictive for basic living – and that in relation to the general safety situation at the return centre, this applies to an even higher degree than previously.

Since the Ombudsman’s visit in 2017, the composition of residents has changed. The largest group at Kærshovedgård now consists of persons who have been ordered by a court to leave Denmark but who are not cooperating and who did not previously live at the return centre.

It is the Ombudsman’s impression that the residents feel less safe at the return centre, including that there is a great deal of crime, for instance sale of drugs. In addition, the atmosphere at the return centre is marked by brutalisation, and a significant number of residents have problems with substance abuse.

On that basis, the Ombudsman recommends that the return centre starts initiatives to ensure that the return centre becomes a safer place to stay.

‘The safety situation for residents at Kærshovedgård seems to have worsened since the Ombudsman’s last visit, and this is a development that should be improved. These are people that have been ordered to reside at Kærshovedgård by the authorities, and it should therefore be ensured that the return centre is a safe place to stay’, says Parliamentary Ombudsman Niels Fenger.

The Ombudsman also recommends that fixed procedures be implemented to screen new residents for suicide risk in connection with their arrival at the return centre.

During the Ombudsman’s monitoring visit, 46 persons with tolerated residence status were living at the return centre.

The Ombudsman visited Kærshovedgård together with the Danish Institute for Human Rights and DIGNITY – Danish Institute Against Torture. During the monitoring visit, the Ombudsman and his visiting team spoke with, among others, 17 residents with tolerated residence status and residence obligation, and he had the opportunity to inspect the physical conditions at the return centre.

Read the Ombudsman's statement (in Danish only).

Further details:

Director of International Relations Klavs Kinnerup Hede, kkh@ombudsmanden.dk