Press release no. 01/25 - Date Thursday | 27 November 2025

European Ombudswoman Teresa Anjinho has found a number of procedural shortcomings in how the European Commission prepared several legislative proposals that it considered urgent. Taken together the shortcomings amounted to maladministration.

The findings are based on three separate complaint-based inquiries that examined the extent to which the Commission applied the standard policy-making rules and procedures when preparing legislative drafts concerning corporate sustainability due diligence (Omnibus I), the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and countering migrant smuggling.

When preparing these urgent legislative proposals, the Commission did not carry out certain parts of its own Better Regulation rules which are meant to ensure law-making is evidence-based, transparent, and inclusive.

“The Commission must be able to respond urgently to different situations, particularly in the current geopolitical context. However, it needs to ensure that accountability and transparency continue to be part of its legislative processes and that its actions are clearly explained to citizens,” said Ms Anjinho.

“In future, a better balance needs to be struck between having an agile administration and guaranteeing minimum procedural standards for law-making. Certain principles of good law-making cannot be compromised even for the sake of urgency.”  

“The Commission should improve its Better Regulation rules so that preparation of urgent legislation remains transparent and evidence-based,” said the Ombudswoman.

The procedural shortcomings identified by the Ombudswoman’s inquiries included failing to fully justify the urgency of the legislative proposals to the public and to document its reasoning for deviating from its internal rules on law making, known as Better Regulation rules.

There were also problems specific to each of the three legislative processes including: 

- reducing the consultation time between Commission departments to less than 24 hours over a weekend (Omnibus I)

- publishing a document with evidence to support the legislative proposal late (migrant smuggling legislation) and after the legislation had already been approved (CAP)

- No clear internal records of a climate consistency assessment being carried out (CAP and Omnibus I)

Recommendations and further suggestions

In her two forward-looking recommendations to the Commission, the Ombudswoman asked it to ensure a predictable, consistent and non-arbitrary application of the Better Regulation rules and that future urgent preparation of legislative proposals is always transparent, evidence-based, and inclusive.

The Ombudswoman also made a number of suggestions in light of the upcoming revision of the Better Regulation rules. These include clarifying that climate assessments should be carried out for all legislative proposals and clarifying minimum standards for stakeholder consultations in urgent procedures.

Background

The Better Regulation Guidelines set out the rules that the European Commission follows when preparing new initiatives and proposals and when managing and evaluating existing legislation.

While the Commission has said that the Better Regulation rules are not legally binding, the Ombudsman has consistently found that EU institutions should apply the rules they have established for themselves.

All three inquiries - related to the sustainability Omnibus, CAP, and legislative proposals to counter migrant smuggling - were opened following complaints by civil society organisations.

The Ombudswoman’s recommendation can be found here.

La adjunta primera del Defensor del Pueblo, Teresa Jiménez-Becerril, ha participado en la Asamblea General de la Red Europea de Instituciones Nacionales de Derechos Humanos (ENNHRI), celebrada en Bruselas los días 19 y 20 de noviembre, y en la Conferencia de la Red Europea de Defensores del Pueblo (ENO), que también ha tenido lugar en la capital comunitaria los días 20 y 21 de este mismo mes.

La Asamblea de ENNHRI reunió a representantes de más de 40 instituciones nacionales de derechos humanos (INDH) de toda Europa para abordar los principales retos existentes en derechos humanos, en el Estado de Derecho y en el fortalecimiento institucional. En este encuentro internacional se subrayó la necesidad de seguir respaldando a aquellas INDH que aún no cuentan con estatus internacional de conformidad con los Principios de París. Se recordó, en este foro, que este reconocimiento se concede a las instituciones creadas por la Constitución o por ley, y que actúan con plena independencia del poder ejecutivo para promover y proteger los derechos humanos en sus respectivos países.

El encuentro concluyó con la aprobación del Plan Estratégico de ENNHRI 2026–2030, así como del Plan Operativo y el Presupuesto para 2026. El nuevo Plan Estratégico parte de la idea de que unas INDH sólidas y resilientes están en mejores condiciones de defender los derechos humanos, la democracia y el Estado de Derecho. Cuanto más eficazmente cumplen sus mandatos, mayor legitimidad y confianza pública generan, lo que a su vez contribuye a fortalecer la red de las INDH.

A través de los distintos grupos de trabajo de la red se abordaron retos temáticos emergentes como la inteligencia artificial, las empresas y derechos humanos, la migración y el asilo, el cambio climático, así como los derechos de las personas mayores y de las personas con discapacidad.

La Asamblea General puso de relieve la importancia de la cooperación entre las instituciones nacionales de derechos humanos, las agencias europeas y los órganos del Consejo de Europa y Naciones Unidas, especialmente en un momento que exige respuestas sólidas, coordinadas y basadas en los derechos humanos.

Red Europea de Defensores del Pueblo (ENO)
Por otra parte, la Conferencia de la Red Europea de Defensores del Pueblo (ENO), organizada por la Defensora del Pueblo Europeo, se estructuró en torno a ocho reuniones de trabajo que abordaron temas monográficos tales como el seguimiento de la aplicación del Derecho de la Unión Europea por parte de los defensores del pueblo y las implicaciones de la simplificación normativa en su labor, los retos que plantea la supervisión de instituciones semiprivadas —entidades con algún grado de privatización o gestión mixta—, el Pacto Europeo de Migración y Asilo y las dificultades derivadas de las quejas transfronterizas que afectan a varios Estados miembros, especialmente en áreas como la atención sanitaria, la fiscalidad, las prestaciones sociales o el reconocimiento de estudios para trabajar.

Teresa Jiménez-Becerril participó en el taller dedicado a los obstáculos que encuentran los ciudadanos de la Unión Europea que residen, trabajan, estudian o se jubilan en otro país de la UE. Se examinaron los problemas relacionados con la aplicación del Derecho de la UE en estas materias y las soluciones aportadas por las oficinas de Defensor del Pueblo, que abarcan desde el reconocimiento de títulos hasta el reembolso de gastos médicos, como cuestiones tributarias.

Asimismo, la adjunta primera estuvo presente en el taller sobre el Pacto Europeo de Migración y Asilo, en el que se analizó el impacto que tendrá su entrada en vigor en junio de 2026, que introduce cambios significativos en los procedimientos, la gestión de fronteras y el reparto de responsabilidades entre los Estados miembros. Se destacó que su aplicación va a implicar un aumento de las funciones de supervisión de las oficinas de Ombudsman para garantizar la protección de los derechos en los procedimientos de asilo, en los centros de recepción, en las devoluciones y en los distintos mecanismos de control.

La Conferencia de la Red Europea de Defensores del Pueblo ha supuesto una oportunidad para reforzar la cooperación entre los defensores del pueblo nacionales e instituciones y mecanismos de la UE, facilitando el conocimiento mutuo y el intercambio de experiencias para abordar, de manera conjunta, los desafíos que requerirán una atención creciente por parte de quienes trabajan en la defensa de los derechos fundamentales.

En estos dos encuentros internacionales la adjunta primera estuvo acompañada por su directora de Gabinete, María José Pastor.

"Bei Barrierefreiheit geht es nicht um ein Extra-Service oder Luxus, sondern um ein Grundrecht", betont Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz anlässlich des Internationalen Tages der Menschen mit Behinderung am 3. Dezember.

„Barrierefreiheit bedeutet Selbstbestimmtheit für die Betroffenen. Noch immer sind Menschen mit Behinderung im Alltag mit Hindernissen konfrontiert, die vermeidbar wären – wenn man sie ernst nimmt. Es geht nicht um ein Extra-Service oder Luxus, sondern um ein Grundrecht. Ohne fremde Hilfe in ein Amtsgebäude oder in ein Museum zu kommen, öffentliche Verkehrsmittel zu benutzen oder einfach in die eigenen vier Wände zu gelangen, das sind simple Wünsche, die Menschen mit Behinderungen oft verwehrt bleiben. Ich sage: Barrierefreiheit ist nicht die Kür, sondern Pflicht. Aber hier gibt es noch viel zu tun“, betont Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz im Vorfeld zum Int. Tag der Menschen mit Behinderung.

„Ich habe ein Problem damit, wenn Menschen mit Behinderung zu Bittstellern degradiert werden und setze mich mit aller Kraft für echte Inklusion ein“, verweist die Volksanwältin etwa auf die Sozialservicestelle Wels, die aufgrund ihrer Hartnäckigkeit mittlerweile mittels einer mobilen Rampe barrierefrei erreicht werden kann. Die Volksanwältin hat sich auch am Friedhof Stammersdorf eingeschalten. Dort wurden zur Förderung der Biodiversität Wege aus Waschbetonplatten entfernt, wodurch der barrierefreie Zugang zu Gräbern erschwert ist. „Barrierefreiheit darf nicht der Biodiversität geopfert werden. Ich bleibe dran, bis es eine Lösung gibt, die beiden Anliegen gerecht wird“, so Gaby Schwarz.

Auch die Volksanwaltschaft selbst hat sich in pucto Barrierefreiheit verbessert – nämlich mit dem Relaunch ihrer Homepage. Die Website www.volksanwaltschaft.gv.at wurde 2025 grunderneuert und ist jetzt noch benutzerfreundlicher. Texte können dank KI-Unterstützung mehrsprachig und auch in Leichter Sprache angezeigt werden. „Ich bin stolz darauf, dass unsere Homepage nun dem höchsten Standard an Barrierefreiheit entspricht. Das macht uns zu einem nationalen Vorzeigemodell“, hält Gaby Schwarz fest.

The Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon, was invited to deliver a keynote speech during a European meeting of the World Services Group, organised by MAMO TCV. The meeting formed part of a closed professional forum bringing together senior legal practitioners to discuss current legal, regulatory and governance developments affecting Europe.

The theme of the Ombudsman’s keynote address was “The Ombudsman. Another access to justice.” In his address, Judge Zammit McKeon underlined that the Constitution remains the primary democratic benchmark safeguarding the rule of law and fundamental rights. He stressed that access to justice must be as broad as possible and that meaningful justice is a core component of good governance.

He explained that access to justice should not be understood solely as recourse to courts or tribunals. Drawing on his experience as a former judge of the Superior Courts and as a litigation lawyer, he emphasised that alternative avenues exist, particularly where grievances arise from acts or omissions of the public administration.

The Ombudsman highlighted the role of the Ombudsman Act 1995, which establishes an investigative mechanism that can prevent disputes from escalating into litigation. He described the Office as providing free and accessible redress, offering individuals the opportunity to hold public authorities to account without the cost and delay of court proceedings.

Judge Zammit McKeon underlined that the Ombudsman does not compete with the courts. The distinction lies in the nature of the Ombudsman’s powers, which are rooted in the ability to assess not only legality but also fairness, reasonableness and justice. He referred to the wide margin of appreciation conferred by the law, allowing the Ombudsman to address decisions that, while lawful, may still be wrong or unjust.

He explained that the Ombudsman issues recommendations with strong moral authority rather than executive orders. This enables the Office to identify structural weaknesses in public services and promote improvements in the public interest. The Ombudsman also plays an explanatory role by clarifying to complainants how public bodies have justified their actions, contributing to transparency and understanding.

The address concluded by highlighting the Ombudsman’s role in defending individuals where complaints are upheld and, where necessary, drawing the attention of the Prime Minister and Parliament to persistent failures by public authorities. The Ombudsman also noted the relevance of EU law, explaining that serious breaches may be brought to the attention of the European Commission, reinforcing accountability at both national and European levels.

The event was held at the offices of MAMO TCV in Valletta, a member of the World Services Group’s European circle of firms that meet twice yearly to exchange views and strengthen professional networks. The Malta meeting was hosted as part of this ongoing cycle of European engagements.

World Services Group is a prominent global network of independent professional service firms. Founded in 2002, it connects more than 120 firms across over 150 jurisdictions, bringing together over 23,000 legal professionals and a small number of selected investment banking and accounting firms. The network facilitates cross-border cooperation, knowledge sharing and collaboration on complex international matters.

The Human Rights Ombudsman (Ombudsman), in its role as a national human rights institution, is committed to the protection and promotion of human rights in all areas, including within the economy. In this light, it has long advocated for effective legislation in the field of corporate governance, which will ensure the protection of human rights and the environment, as well as transparent and responsible business operations.

In 2024, the Ombudsman welcomed the adoption of the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD)^[1] and, before that, the European Union's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)^[2]. Both directives were recognised at European Union (EU) level as a major milestone in ensuring transparency, accountability and promoting sustainable business practices, and represent a crucial step towards greater respect for human rights and the environment by businesses.

Following the presentation of the new Omnibus legislative proposal of the European Commission regarding simplifications in the field of corporate sustainability reporting and due diligence in companies regarding sustainability (the so-called Omnibus I package)^[3] the Ombudsman took a critical position, which it informed the competent Ministry of the Economy, Tourism and Sport (MGTŠ) about in March this year, sent to the Government of the Republic of Slovenia for information, and informed the Slovenian Members of the European Parliament about it. At that time, the Ombudsman assessed that the proposed changes significantly weaken some key elements of the already adopted CSDDD and CSRD directives and represent a major step back from the already established international consensus regarding the responsibility of companies in the field of human rights and the environment. The proposals of the European Commission in the Omnibus I legislative package are largely inadequate and disproportionate, and harmful to the areas of human rights and the environment.

As the final and crucial phase of negotiations within the framework of the EU institutions' trilogue in Brussels begins, the Ombudsman, together with the umbrella European Network of National Human Rights Institutions (ENNHRI), which represents more than 50 national human rights institutions across Europe, once again draws attention to the main shortcomings of the legislative proposals within the Omnibus I package. Below, we highlight the main recommendations from the ENNHRI joint statement, which is addressed to all decision-makers within the framework of the EU institutions' trilogue:

1. Alignment with international standards and good practice: European co-legislators should commit to adopting an approach to due diligence that is aligned with existing international instruments and good practices of economic operators.

2. Scope: The scope of entities covered by the CSDDD and CSRD should be as broad as possible in order to encourage companies to fulfil their responsibility to respect human rights.

3. Risk-based approach to due diligence: The approach in the CSDDD should be aligned as much as possible with the UN Guiding Principles on Business (UNGP) and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises. These are internationally recognised standards that require companies to take a realistic and risk-based approach. This is the most appropriate way for companies to effectively identify and address impacts on people and the environment and avoid unnecessary administrative burdens resulting from fragmentation and duplication of processes.

4. Limitations in the name of reducing bureaucratic burdens: The CSDDD should be based on due diligence based on identifying and addressing risks. This necessarily includes access to relevant data, including the possibility of requesting information from business partners. It is not about additional bureaucratic burdens, but about the efficiency of such procedures. A pragmatic approach is needed that allows for cooperation with business partners, as this is the only way for companies to carry out risk-based due diligence in line with the UNGP and the OECD Guidelines.

5. Stakeholder engagement: Stakeholder engagement should remain a central element of the due diligence process in CSDDD, and the broad definition of stakeholders, which also includes national human rights institutions, should be maintained.

6. Civil liability and access to justice: The original provisions on civil liability in the CSDDD should be maintained with the aim of ensuring uniformity and coherence across the EU. It should also restore the mandatory overriding application of the provisions (under the CSDDD, Member States must make the civil liability rules of the Directive mandatory overriding application) and ensure that the elements of access to justice allow for effective access to a remedy for rightsholders.

7. Climate transition plans: The obligation to adopt and implement climate transition plans should be maintained in the CSDDD.

8. European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) and sectoral standards: The ESRS standards should be implemented in a way that allows for simplification but without compromising the integrity of the standards, including in relation to social sustainability and human rights. The CSRD should maintain the requirement to adopt sectoral standards or guidelines.

The Ombudsman recalls that the protection of the environment and human rights is a prerequisite for a safe and stable economic environment and sustainable development that benefits everyone – businesses, employees, communities, and future generations.