News reports around the planned meeting between the US and Russian presidents in Alaska this week have so far been dominated by discourse about security and territory. While the international community’s continuing commitment to ending the war in Ukraine is encouraging, it is crucial that human rights are integrated into peace negotiations.

A comprehensive, just and lasting peace for Ukraine can only be achieved if it is anchored in the international human rights framework. As the only universally agreed roadmap for honouring human dignity, human rights provide the reliable framework for settling disputes and form a solid foundation for just and sustainable peace-making. The best long-term defence against Russian aggression is to stand by our principles and defend the human rights and values that are under attack.

Ukraine, as the sovereign state that is the target of Russia’s illegal aggression, must always be present at the negotiating table as pointed out by Alain Berset, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. Those responsible for gross human rights violations and international crimes must be held accountable. Victims should receive reparations. All prisoners of war and all civilian detainees, including children, must be released. The human rights of people living in territories of Ukraine temporarily occupied by Russia, to the extent that these areas may continue to be under occupation, must be respected. My recent Memorandum on human rights elements for peace in Ukraine offers insights into how to address these and other issues. Any peace agreement will be fragile unless human rights concerns are explicitly acknowledged and respected.

Mitte Mai 2025 wurde medial von „Zaunparties“ und Raufhandel in der Justizanstalt Münnichplatz Wien-Simmering berichtet. Um die kolportierten Vorfälle zu verifizieren, hat Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz ein amtswegiges Prüfverfahren eingeleitet, der Abschlussbericht liegt nun vor. „Unser Bericht bestätigt einmal mehr, dass man die Justizanstalt Gerasdorf nicht hätte schließen dürfen, bevor der Münnichplatz fertig ist. Dass es zu derartigen Vorfällen kommt, war absehbar. Mit zu wenig Personal, laufender Baustelle und verfrühter Inbetriebnahme musste es so weit kommen“, so das Fazit von Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz.

Um künftig zu verhindern, dass Zivilisten über den Anstaltszaun klettern, wird ein Zaun versetzt und zusätzliche Bepflanzung angelegt. „Diese Maßnahmen wären vor Inbetriebnahme notwendig gewesen. Dass jetzt nachgerüstet werden muss, unterstreicht meine Kritik, dass die Realisierung des Projekts Münnichplatz seit Beginn ein logistischer Bauchfleck ist. Zuerst die Baustelle abschließen, alle Mängel beseitigen, für genügend Personal sorgen und dann erst in Betrieb nehmen, wäre im Sinne der Jugendlichen und des Teams besser gewesen“, resümiert die Volksanwältin die zentralen Ergebnisse des Prüfberichts.

Gründe für die Raufhandel liegen laut Volksanwaltschaft am Verlauf der suboptimalen Inbetriebnahme: Im Jänner wurden elf Insassen auf den Münnichplatz überstellt. Im März waren es bereits 21. Mit zunehmendem Belag, laufender Baustelle, zu wenig Personal und der daraus resultierenden Ausdehnung der Einschlusszeiten ist es zu Unruhe unter den Insassen gekommen. „Wenn Jugendliche ab 16.30 Uhr im Haftraum eingesperrt sind, braucht sich niemand wundern, wenn sie auf dumme Ideen kommen“, attestiert Gaby Schwarz und betont: „Ich weise laufend darauf hin, dass Personalmangel im Bereich der Fachdienste sowie der Justizwache ein großer Risikofaktor ist.“

„Mit der neuen Anstaltsleiterin und ihren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern ist ein engagiertes Team jeden Tag bemüht, die Jugendlichen während des Baustellenbetriebs bestmöglich zu betreuen. Ob es gelingt, bis Herbst die Baustelle abzuschließen und in den Vollbetrieb mit Schule zu gehen, wage ich zu bezweifeln. Laut unserer Informationen sind zahlreiche Stellen noch unbesetzt - sowohl bei der Justizwache als auch beim Fachpersonal“, so Volksanwältin Gaby Schwarz, mit einem abschließenden Ausblick: „Wenn schlussendlich alles wie geplant realisiert wird, kann die Justizanstalt Münnichplatz zu einem Vorzeigeprojekt werden. Allerdings werden die Kapazitäten mit den Jugendlichen der Josefstadt voraussichtlich ausgeschöpft sein. Der Münnichplatz wird also nicht wie geplant die gesamte Ostregion entlasten können.“

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva today submitted to the National Assembly the name of Maria Filipova as a candidate for the position of Deputy Ombudsman. Filipova was ranked first with 15 points by a five-member evaluation committee, which heard the three candidates proposed by non-governmental organisations on 14 August this year.

18 August 2025

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva today submitted to the National Assembly the name of Maria Filipova as a candidate for the position of Deputy Ombudsman. Filipova was ranked first with 15 points by a five-member evaluation committee, which heard the three candidates proposed by non-governmental organisations on 14 August this year.

The esteemed panel of legal experts, consisting of Professor Tsvetan Sivkov, Professor Gabriela Belova, Associate Professor Ralitsa Ilkova, Associate Professor Aneta Antonova and Associate Professor Hristo Ormandzhiev, ranked the candidates according to a pre-announced methodology, awarding first place with 15 points to Maria Filipova, nominated by the Bulgarian National Association of Active Consumers. Second place with 13 points went to Marina Kisyova de Geus, nominated by Ekaterina Karavelova Foundation, and third place with 12 points went to Denitsa Dimitrova, nominated by the National Network for Children.

The hearing of the candidates was conducted in accordance with the procedure, in a public and transparent manner, and was broadcast in real time on the Ombudsman website and on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/live/9oI5AE7bGrA?si=143c6yvUGHtnHqvt

The nominees presented concepts for their work as deputy ombudsman, after which they answered questions from the panel members and non-governmental organisations—the Bulgarian Institute for Legal Initiatives Foundation, the Bulgarian Fund for Women Foundation, and the Bulgarian Centre for Not-for-Profit Law Foundation.

The letter to the National Assembly and the minutes of the hearing are available here: https://www.ombudsman.bg/bg/n/ombudsmanat-velislava-delcheva-predlaga-na-2325

Procedural rules are available here: https://www.ombudsman.bg/bg/p/protsedura-za-nominirane-na-zamestnik-ombud-608

The complainant contacted the Ombudsman because she believed that the Ljubljana District Court had wrongly served her court documents in her secure electronic mailbox (SED) in probate proceedings, even though she had not requested this, and as a result, she had missed the deadline for appealing against these court documents. Since the court had not responded to her warnings, she asked the Ombudsman to intervene.

* * *

A complainant contacted the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia (Ombudsman) on 14 March 2025 with a complaint in which she stated that she was not informed in a timely manner about the service of a Summons to Submit Statements or Inheritance Agreements of the District Court in Ljubljana, case no. O 553/1949 of 20 December 2024 (hereinafter: summons). She emphasized that the summons was served on her in a secure electronic mailbox, although she did not give permission for such a method of service, and that she therefore missed the deadline for appealing against the additional decision on inheritance. Since the court did not respond to her additional written warning on 5 February 2025, she asked the Ombudsman for assistance.

The Ombudsman conducted an inquiry into the matter at the District Court in Ljubljana. In response to the inquiry, the President of the said court explained that in the case under consideration, an error had occurred when serving the Summons and the decision to suspend the procedure for issuing an additional decision on inheritance. Namely, the complainant notified the court electronically in January 2025 that she had not received the court documents, and upon checking the service of the Summons, it was determined that the court document had been sent to her via a secure electronic mailbox (SEP), which the court explained to her in a letter dated 20 January 2025, but it was overlooked that the complainant had not consented to such a method of service. The complainant again alerted the court to the error in service on 28 January 2025 and 5 February 2025, so the deliberating judge took the case over for review and further action.

After reviewing the file, the deliberating judge determined that the service to the complainant's electronic mailbox was incorrect. When performing the service, it was identified in the electronic register that she had an SEP and that the aforementioned option had been selected by the court staff, but it was overlooked that service to natural persons to the SEP, in accordance with the provision of Article 132 of the Civil Procedure Act (ZPP), is only possible if the party requests it or if the court expressly warns them of this. The court therefore served the decision and court documents on the complainant again on 19 May 2025 and explained in the accompanying letter that there had been an error, which was why the documents were served on her again and that she therefore had a (new) appeal period against the issued decision. Thus, the complainant as a party (heir) was subsequently enabled to participate in the proceedings.

After examining the available information in the case at hand, both that provided by the complainant and that provided by the District Court in Ljubljana on the basis of an inquiry, in connection with the probate proceedings No. O 553/1949 and the issuance of an additional decision on inheritance, it was possible to establish that the complainant's warnings that the service of court documents in connection with the said probate case to her SEP was not correct were clearly justified. On that basis, the District Court in Ljubljana itself recognised this error and corrected it by correctly re-serving and serving the court documents. The error in serving the court documents did not result in any harmful consequences for the complainant, since only with the (correct) service of the court documents could the time limit for her to (have) to perform individual procedural actions (such as, for example, filing an appeal) begin to run.

Since the consequences of the incorrect service of court documents (only on 19 May 2025) were eliminated and no potentially harmful consequences arose that could affect the legal position of the complainant, the basis for further consideration of the matter in question and any further intervention by the Ombudsman in relation to it ceased to exist, and therefore the Ombudsman closed the procedure for considering this matter. 

La Defensoría de la Infancia y Adolescencia de Andalucía (DIAA) ha analizado la salud mental infantil y juvenil como una prioridad en las políticas públicas en la última publicación de la revista que editan defensores de España e Iberoamérica integrados en la Red de Niñez y Adolescencia de la Federación Iberoamericana del Ombudsperson (FIO). En esta publicación participan junto a la Defensoría andaluza la Defensoría del Pueblo de Bolivia, el Síndic de Greuges de Cataluña, el Ararteko vasco, la Defensoría del Pueblo de Perú, la Comisión estatal de Derechos Humanos del Estado de Nuevo León (México) y la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la Ciudad de México.  

En su posicionamiento del 29 de octubre de 2024, la Red de Niñez y Adolescencia de la FIO ya instó a los países a reconocer el derecho a la salud mental de las infancias y adolescencias como una “prioridad tanto en las agendas públicas como en las instituciones nacionales de derechos humanos, estas últimas tienen la importante labor de alertar continuamente sobre los hechos que puedan vulnerar el derecho a la salud, la vida y la integridad”.

A este respecto, la Organización Mundial de la Salud reconoce la salud mental como un derecho humano fundamental, entendido como un estado de bienestar que permite a las personas desarrollar sus habilidades, afrontar situaciones difíciles y participar activamente en su comunidad. Por ello, todas las personas, incluidas niñas, niños y adolescentes, tienen derecho a acceder al más alto nivel de salud mental y a recibir atención accesible, digna y de calidad.

En las últimas décadas se han impulsado cambios significativos; se ha transitado de visiones marcadas por el estigma a enfoques que buscan sensibilizar sobre su impacto en el bienestar integral y el respeto a la dignidad humana, y se ha avanzado hacia la adopción de un modelo biopsicosocial que integra factores biológicos, psicológicos y sociales en la prevención y tratamiento, alejándose de una perspectiva exclusivamente biomédica. Asimismo, se reconoce que el lenguaje desempeña un papel crucial en la salud mental, pues influye en la percepción, el acceso a la atención y la reducción del estigma. Debido a que el derecho a la salud mental de niñas, niños y adolescentes es prioritario, esta publicación se centra en las experiencias y reflexiones que en torno al tema tienen las instituciones que integran esta Red.

•  Revista FIO SALUD-MENTAL