Le Médiateur fédéral et le médiateur des pensions estiment qu'il devrait être possible pour les citoyens de rembourser volontairement leurs allocations si cela leur permet d'obtenir ou de conserver une pension plus avantageuse. Actuellement, il est possible de rembourser volontairement une indemnité de maladie, mais cela n'est pas possible pour une allocation octroyée par l’Office national de l’emploi (ONEM) dans le cadre de la réglementation sur le chômage. Le Médiateur fédéral a adressé une recommandation à ce sujet au ministre de l'Emploi, car il estime que les citoyens doivent être traités de manière équitable et égale.

Réduire le montant de la pension

Imaginez que cela vous arrive. Vous percevez une pension au taux ménage ou avez droit à une pension de survie, mais vous devez en restituer une partie importante parce que vous ou votre époux.se avez perçu, pendant une courte période, des allocations de l'ONEM. Or, le montant des allocations de chômage était nettement inférieur au montant de la pension que vous devez rembourser. Il s'agit par exemple de l'allocation de garde versée par l’ONEM, à une accueillante dont quelques enfants étaient temporairement absents ou de l'allocation de chômage temporaire versée à un ouvrier qui n'a pas pu travailler pendant une courte période en raison d’une offensive hivernale.

Vous contactez le Service fédéral des pensions, qui vous conseille de contacter l'ONEM afin de rembourser les allocations plutôt que le montant de la pension. C'est en effet la solution la plus avantageuse pour vous. L'ONEM vous informe toutefois que cela n'est pas possible.

Plaintes auprès du médiateur

Au cours des dernières années, le Médiateur fédéral et le médiateur des pensions ont régulièrement reçu des plaintes de personnes se trouvant dans cette situation. Le service de Médiation pensions a transmis les plaintes au Médiateur fédéral, qui est compétent pour traiter les plaintes concernant l'ONEM. Le Médiateur fédéral a examiné les dossiers et discuté du problème avec l'ONEM. Pour l'ONEM, le remboursement n'est pas possible car la réglementation, qu’il doit respecter, ne prévoit pas le remboursement volontaire de ces allocations.

Enquête du Médiateur fédéral

On ne peut pas cumuler une pension avec un revenu de remplacement, comme une allocation de maladie ou une allocation de chômage. Lorsqu’une personne perçoit une pension de ménage (c’est-à-dire une pension qu’une personne mariée peut recevoir lorsque son/sa conjoint·e n’a pas ou très peu de revenus ou de pension), son/sa conjoint·e ne peut pas non plus percevoir de revenu de remplacement. De même, une pension de survie (pension versée au conjoint survivant après un décès) ne peut généralement pas non plus être cumulée sans restriction avec un revenu de remplacement. Si le service des pensions constate un cumul entre une pension et un revenu de remplacement, il réclamera, selon le cas, une partie ou la totalité de la pension pour la période pendant laquelle le revenu de remplacement a été versé.

Cela peut entraîner des situations financières défavorables : le montant perdu en pension est parfois supérieur au revenu de remplacement perçu. Une solution serait de rembourser volontairement le revenu de remplacement afin de pouvoir prétendre à la pension. Cependant, cela n'est actuellement pas possible dans le cadre de la réglementation sur le chômage.

L'enquête du Médiateur fédéral montre que le même problème se pose lorsque des personnes ont été malades et ont perçu des indemnités de maladie : la pension au taux ménage et les indemnités de maladie ne sont pas non plus cumulables. Mais ici, il y a une différence importante puisqu’il est possible de rembourser volontairement ces indemnités de maladie et de conserver ainsi un montant de pension plus avantageux. Ce que l'INAMI a confirmé au Médiateur fédéral.

Recommandation au ministre

« Il n’est pas juste que des citoyens perdent de l’argent. Cela nuit à leur confiance dans les services publics. De plus, il y a une inégalité de traitement, car les personnes qui ont perçu des allocations de l'ONEM ne peuvent pas résoudre le problème, contrairement à celles qui ont perçu des indemnités de maladie. C'est pourquoi nous demandons au ministre de l'Emploi d'adapter la réglementation afin que les citoyens puissent conserver l'intégralité de leur pension si elles remboursent les autres allocations », explique le Médiateur fédéral Jérôme Aass.

Le médiateur des pensions insiste également pour que la recommandation du Médiateur fédéral soit mise en œuvre et que ce problème, qui a été porté à son attention par plusieurs pensionnés ces dernières années, soit enfin résolu.

Le Médiateur fédéral a soumis la recommandation à l'ONEM. L'ONEM a fait savoir qu'il approuvait l'analyse et qu'il examinerait avec le ministre de l'Emploi la manière dont la recommandation pourrait être mise en œuvre.

Pour lire la recommandation : Remboursement volontaire des allocations dans le cadre de la réglementation du chômage 

Nei giorni scorsi presso l’Istituto Superiore Margherita di Castelvì di Sassari, la difesa civica della Regione Sardegna ha promosso un incontro speciale con gli studenti, insieme alla Dinamo Basket Femminile, per parlare di diritti, legalità, violenza di genere e valori dello sport.

“È fondamentale educare i giovani al rispetto dei diritti e alla cultura della legalità, incoraggiando comportamenti responsabili anche nello sport”, ha dichiarato l’Avv. Marco Enrico, Difensore Civico della Sardegna. “Giornate come questa permettono agli studenti di confrontarsi direttamente con professionisti e atlete, comprendendo quanto i valori civici siano parte integrante della vita quotidiana e della società. Vedere l’entusiasmo e la partecipazione dei ragazzi mi conferma che investire nella formazione civica e nella sensibilizzazione contro la violenza di genere è un impegno necessario e prezioso per il futuro della nostra comunità”.

L’iniziativa ha riscosso grande entusiasmo tra gli studenti, che hanno partecipato attivamente con domande e riflessioni. La collaborazione tra difesa civica e Dinamo Basket Femminile ha reso l’incontro non solo educativo, ma anche coinvolgente e motivante, dimostrando come lo sport possa essere veicolo di valori positivi e strumento di prevenzione della violenza di genere.

Una bellissima giornata che conferma il ruolo fondamentale della difesa civica nel promuovere cultura, diritti e legalità nelle scuole della Sardegna.

As part of the events commemorating its 30th Anniversary, the Office of the Ombudsman organised its first Service Award Ceremony to recognise and thank its staff for their dedicated service over the years.

The ceremony was held to express appreciation to all members of the Ombudsman’s Office who, through their daily work, support individuals seeking assistance and redress. This initiative marked the first time that the Office formally recognised staff service in this way.

In his opening remarks, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon, explained that the ceremony was conceived as a gesture of gratitude towards employees who have consistently served the public with commitment and professionalism. He underlined that the effectiveness and credibility of the Office depend on the dedication of its staff and that, without their support, the institution could not fulfil its mandate.

The Ombudsman encouraged employees to continue carrying out their duties with the same sense of responsibility and empathy, always keeping in mind the people who feel excluded from the system or who turn to the Office in search of fairness and redress.

Service awards were presented in three categories, recognising staff with up to ten years of service, those with between eleven and twenty years, and those who have served for more than twenty years. Special recognition was given to long-serving members of staff, including Ms Maria Mifsud, Head of the Secretariat, who has served the Office for twenty-five years, and Mr Gordon Fitz, Finance Manager, and Ms Marthese Muscat, Translations Coordinator, both of whom have been with the Office since its establishment in 1995.

During the ceremony, the Ombudsman presented a commemorative memento to all members of staff as a mark of appreciation for their contribution to the work of the Office over the years.

Parliamentary Ombudsman Petri Jääskeläinen has issued a reprimand to the Finnish Institute of International Affairs on a matter concerning the selection of a higher education trainee and the procurement of communications services. He draws the Institute’s serious attention to the development of its administration.

The Ombudsman considers that several points in the Institute’s conduct give rise to criticism.

Selection procedure for the higher education trainee

With regard to the selection process for the higher education trainee, the Ombudsman considers that the Finnish Institute of International Affairs has acted in violation of good administration or otherwise unlawfully as follows:

• The publication of two different job advertisements in two different channels and in such a way that the difference in the content of the advertisements concerned a factor that was decisive from the point of view of considering the application does not fulfil an authority's obligation laid down in the Administrative Procedure Act to treat equally those to whom it is providing services in administrative matters.
• The communication by the Institute’s HR officer to those interested in the placement and to the applicants was not in accordance with the requirement of equality laid down in the Administrative Procedure Act. It was not only a question of stylistic differences, but also of content-related differences that were clearly central from the point of view of the application procedure.
• The of applying the prerequisites set for the higher education trainee in the job advertisement did not comply with the principle of legitimate expectations and the requirement of equality laid down in the Administrative Procedure Act. The information in the job advertisement deviated from the procedure followed in practice, and the notified and adopted procedure was applied to different applicants in different ways.
• The Ombudsman has considered it contrary to good administration and the Administrative Procedure Act that, based on the report received, a written decision by the Director was not made at the Institute on the selection of the trainee. In addition, the memorandum of selection was incomplete in many respects.

Based on the report received, the Ombudsman considers that he has no reason to suspect that persons disqualified under the Administrative Procedure Act participated in the selection process.

Selection of the higher education trainee

The Ombudsman notes that it is the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s duty to monitor the legality of the procedure followed. The Parliamentary Ombudsman may also assess whether the authority has exercised its discretion within the limits permitted by law. On the other hand, the Ombudsman cannot perform a new comparison of the applicants and, in particular, cannot comment on which of the applicants would be the most suitable for the task in terms of competence and personal characteristics, or who should have been selected for the task.

A recruitment decision is a question of an overall assessment. For example, the employer has discretion in deciding how the requirements for the task advertised and the applicants’ merits are emphasised in the comparison.

Although the Ombudsman has criticised the procedure followed in the selection of the higher education trainee, he does not have sufficient grounds to consider that the end result of the selection exceeded the Institute’s powers of discretion.

Procurement of communications services

The Ombudsman criticises the procurement of communications services by the Finnish Institute of International Affairs as follows:

• An explanatory memorandum required by the procurement rules had not been drawn up on the procurement. Without the explanatory memorandum, it is difficult to verify whether the legal principles of administration and other requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act and the procurement rule have been complied with in the procurement procedure. The Ombudsman is not entirely convinced that the grounds for direct procurement laid down in the procurement rules were at hand.
• The Ombudsman has found it problematic that, in practice, the Institute's activities are subject to different procurement guidelines than what is stated about the applicable procurement guidelines in the Institute's rules of procedure.

Provision of information and reports to the Ombudsman

The Ombudsman considers that the Finnish Institute of International Affairs has neglected its obligation under the Constitution of Finland to provide the Parliamentary Ombudsman with all information required for the oversight of legality that the Ombudsman has requested.

The Ombudsman has considered it necessary that the Institute organise its administration and activities in such a way that the problems which have now arisen will not occur again in the future.

Measures

The report received by the Ombudsman does not indicate in all respects the person or persons responsible for each of the above-mentioned procedures. The Parliamentary Ombudsman has therefore targeted his criticism at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs as an agency.

Pursuant to section 10 of the Parliamentary Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman has issued a reprimand to the Finnish Institute of International Affairs for the above-mentioned practices that are partly contrary to good administration and partly otherwise unlawful, and drawn the Institute’s serious attention to the development of its administration.

The Ombudsman’s decision no 5036/2025 has been published on the website www.oikeusasiamies.fi.

Further information is available from Principal Legal Adviser Heini Färkkilä, tel. +358 9 432 3374.

n December 17, 2025, Public Defender Levan Ioseliani participated in a conference organized by the Parliamentary Temporary Commission on Women and Children's Issues. The topics discussed at the conference inlcuded achievements, challenges and future prospects at the level of preschool, inclusive and general education.

In his speech, the Public Defender focused on the importance of access to education and issues of coordinated work, which implies the involvement of both teachers and professional groups, as well as parents, in the process.

"Despite the steps taken, there are still many serious challenges in the field, which the Public Defender has identified within the framework of his activities.

In the field of preschool education, the shortage of inclusive education specialists in the regions is particularly noteworthy. It is also necessary to raise the awareness of employed personnel, improve accessibility of kindergarten infrastructure for children with various disabilities, and effectively monitor inclusive preschool education at the local level. It is important to properly identify children with special educational needs, who are left beyond preschool education, in all municipalities and refer them to appropriate services.

As for general education, it is important to use modern assistive technologies, alternative and augmentative communication tools in the teaching process of students with special educational needs, and strengthen individualized support services. It is necessary to strengthen professional supervision, coordination of the inclusive education process, and internal monitoring in schools. Coordinated work among members of education plan groups and increased involvement of parents of children with disabilities in this process represents a challenge"," said Public Defender Levan Ioseliani.