A seriously ill South London child had to live in damp and mouldy accommodation miles away from their hospital because Lewisham council left it too late to find their homeless family accommodation in the borough, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has found.

The vulnerable young child, who was immuno-compromised and facing two years of hospital treatment, needed to live in accommodation without any mould or damp issues, with no shared facilities and within the borough to be near to their hospital for treatment.

Despite the council’s own assessment alerting it to their needs, the council left the family in their private accommodation until a week before bailiffs evicted them, leaving it with little time to find the family suitable accommodation.

The family had been told by London Borough of Lewisham to stay in their accommodation, facing unaffordable court bills of more than £46 a day, because the council’s policy stated it would not act until a week before bailiffs turned up. The council said it would deem them ‘intentionally homeless’ if they moved before this time, and they would have no right to help.

When the council did act, the only accommodation it could find was in another borough, with damp and mould issues. This meant the child’s nurses could no longer make their weekly visits and instead the child had to travel to hospital, putting them at further risk of harm.

A Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigation found the council took 13 months too long to provide the family with interim accommodation. It also criticised the council's handling of the family’s complaint.

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

“This kind of brinksmanship has placed a severely ill child at grave risk and compounded an already distressing situation by forcing the family to live with the threat of being physically removed from their home hanging over them.

“The council has failed to grasp the seriousness of this case from start to finish and the family's situation was only made worse by the council's failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation or to properly respond to their complaints  

“This awful situation could have been avoided, and more suitable accommodation found sooner, had Lewisham not left it so late to act.

“The council has agreed to end its flawed policy of leaving people facing homelessness in their property until the court grants a bailiff warrant. It will now assess and rectify the situation for others at risk of homelessness in the borough who are awaiting assistance. I hope this will now improve the outlook for people facing homelessness in Lewisham.”

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 and pay the family £9,440.24 to include the avoidable rent arrears the family paid, along with court costs, and avoidable distress and risk of harm.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve processes for the wider public. In this case the council has agreed to identify all open cases where an applicant who may be in priority need has remained beyond expiry of a section 21 eviction notice and assess and act on their cases appropriately.

It will also provide guidance and training to relevant staff and end its blanket policy of waiting until a week before bailiffs evict an applicant and provide interim accommodation instead. It will now identify and implement a process to enable officers to plan for and manage likely future accommodation supply and demand, especially where applicants are assessed as needing to remain in the borough.

On the occasion of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Michael O’Flaherty co-signed a joint statement with international and regional human rights bodies, drawing attention to the profound and lasting suffering inflicted by enforced disappearances on victims, their relatives, and society as a whole. As highlighted in the statement, enforced disappearance is among the gravest human rights violations. It may amount to torture, given the severe anguish caused to both the disappeared and their families.

The absence of truth and justice for thousands of missing persons remains a serious human rights concern in several Council of Europe member states. Experience in Europe over decades shows that enforced disappearances are rarely addressed in a comprehensive manner and tend to persist as unresolved, long-term issues.

In his recent Memorandum on human rights elements for a just and lasting peace in Ukraine, the Commissioner stressed that any peace negotiations must address the issue of the search for missing persons, the release of all prisoners of war and all civilian detainees, and the return of Ukrainian children transferred to Russia, Belarus, or the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine.

“I reiterate my call on all Council of Europe member states that have not yet done so to ratify the UN International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. This is essential to signal universal condemnation of this abhorrent crime and to ensure that, everywhere, enforced disappearances are prevented, investigated, and punished, and that victims and their families receive the support to which they are entitled,” he added.

Joint statement:

To mark the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, international* and regional** Human Rights experts call on States to end the practice of enforced disappearance and avoid the profound suffering endured by its victims, to take preventive measures, and to ensure they receive adequate remedies for the harm suffered, and perpetrators receive proportionate punishment.

They issued the following joint statement today:

Enforced disappearances entail a serious violation of multiple human rights, inflicting profound suffering, experienced not only by those who are forcibly disappeared, but also by their families, their communities, and by society as a whole. They are often practiced as a deliberate strategy of control through terror intended to cause suffering, instill fear, suppress dissent, and punish entire communities. Their commission involves varying degrees of participation, acquiescence, or omission by State agents.

Any act of enforced disappearance places the persons subjected thereto outside the protection of the law and at high risk of being subjected to serious human rights violations. It constitutes a violation of both international and domestic laws that guarantee, among others, the right to recognition as a person before the law, the right to liberty and security of the person and the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It also constitutes a grave threat to the right to life.¹

The prolonged isolation and deprivation of communication with the outside world, to which forcibly disappeared persons are subjected, are harmful to their psychological integrity and that of their relatives, and constitute a violation of the prohibition of torture and/or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Enforced disappearances prevent monitoring by national preventive mechanisms and other competent bodies, facilitating the commission of torture and/or other forms of cruel treatment.² Decades of documentation of this heinous crime show how the practice has often served as a means to circumvent fundamental legal safeguards, including limitations to the duration of deprivation of liberty and the prohibition of violent interrogation methods.

Various international and regional human rights bodies, including the Inter-American Court of Human Rights,³ the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights,⁴ the Committee against Torture,⁵ the Human Rights Committee,⁶ and the European Court of Human Rights,⁷ have recognized enforced disappearances as a form of torture or other ill-treatment against the forcibly disappeared individuals and/or their families.

The Committee on Enforced Disappearances and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances view with concern the continuous torture inflicted upon the relatives of the forcibly disappeared persons.⁸ The daily anguish of not knowing their fate and whereabouts, the fear of never seeing them again, as well as the silence, inaction, official indifference, and impunity that usually surround this crime, inflict on relatives unimaginable pain and despair. Scores of heart-breaking testimonies by family members refer to these experiences as a form of psychological torture or cruel treatment.

The psychological toll on family members is devastating and transgenerational, entailing lasting physical and mental health consequences such as depression, anxiety and profound trauma. Women, in particular, often bear a disproportionate burden, in most cases abruptly having to assume new roles as search organizers, advocates, on top of the additional caring or financial responsibilities they have to assume to their families.

Children grow up in the shadows of fear, doubt and anxiety created by the enforced disappearance, and the rupture of the family structure.

On this International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, we urgently call on all States to strengthen their policies to prevent and eradicate this crime and to guarantee the right of relatives of disappeared persons and society as a whole to know the truth about the fate and whereabouts of those forcibly disappeared, as well as access to justice and integral reparations. We acknowledge the shared aspiration that was recalled by all participants to the World Congress on Enforced Disappearance in January 2025 for truth, healing, and dignity, and reaffirm the value of constructive dialogue and cooperation in fostering a more humane and caring society.

Enforced disappearance is a wound that corrodes the fabric of society. It is a form of torture and/or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that must be condemned unequivocally, prevented and eradicated through collective action, effective prevention, accountability, and sustained support for victims, including through the implementation of the pledges made at the World Congress on Enforced Disappearances.

We stand in solidarity with all those affected by enforced disappearances and reaffirm our commitment to truth, justice, rehabilitation, and reparations for all victims.

This is the occasion for the remaining States that have not yet ratified the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearance and the Inter- American Convention on Forced Disappearance to do their part to eradicate this heinous crime, starting with committing today to ratify them.

• Download the joint statement publish on the occasion of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances (English, French, Spanish)

* UN experts: the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances; the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment the Committee Against Torture; the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the Board of Trustees of the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture.

** Regional Human Rights Experts: the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights; Hon. Idrissa Sow (Chairperson), Working Group on Death Penalty, Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Killings, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights; H.E. Asst. Prof. Dr. Bhanubhatra Jittiang, Representative of Thailand to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights; and Mr. Michael O' Flaherty, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe.

¹ Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, para.1(2); Convention for the Protection of all Persons against Enforced Disappearance, paras. 2, 12.

² CED and WGEID, Joint Statement on so-called “short-term enforced disappearances”, introduction; paras.5, 7.

³ See, for example, Velasquez Rodriguez v. Honduras, para. 156; Omeara Carrascal and others v. Colombia, para. 194, Blake vs. Guatemala, para. 116 and Contreras vs. El Salvador, paras. 119-124.

⁴ Mussie Ephrem v. Eritrea, para. 55

⁵ CAT/C/54/D/456/2011, para. 6.6.

⁶ El-Megreisi v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, CCPR/C/50/D/440/1990, para. 5.4, Mukong v. Cameroon

CCPR/C/51/D/458/1991, para. 9.4; (and Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20 (2009), para. 11. See also General Assembly resolution 68/156, para. 27.

⁷ KURT v. TURKEY, par 133-134.

⁸ CED/C/7, para. 3; WGEID, General Comment on the Right to Truth, para. 4

The European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’ new Brussels Liaison Office has officially opened. It marks an important step in enhancing FRA’s cooperation with EU institutions, Member States’ Permanent Representations in Brussels, European umbrella civil society organisations and other Brussels-based stakeholders.

The Liaison Office will strengthen the dialogue and exchange between the Agency and key stakeholders in Brussels. It will ensure FRA expertise and evidence support the drive to protect and promote fundamental rights across the EU.  

Its presence in Brussels allows the Agency to provide timely input, rapid follow-up and closer cooperation with its key stakeholders.

The Office will act as a hub for stakeholder engagement. It aims to:

• Build closer relationships and partnerships with EU institutions, agencies and Brussels-based stakeholders;
• Enhance FRA's responsiveness to stakeholder needs and emerging policy developments;
• Facilitate more effective cooperation on fundamental rights matters;
• Boost the visibility and impact of FRA’s work through events, briefings and networking.

Friso Roscam Abbing, FRA’s communications adviser, has been appointed Head of the Liaison Office. He brings many years of experience working on strategic communications, stakeholder relations and institutional cooperation on fundamental rights.

By strengthening its presence in the EU capital, FRA reaffirms its commitment to working hand-in-hand with those shaping EU laws and policies, helping to ensure that fundamental rights remain at the heart of Europe’s decision-making. 

Ombudsman Velislava Delcheva and National Social Security Institute Governor Vesela Karaivanova discussed the preparation and the launching of a joint public awareness campaign whose target is the elderly people in connection with the adoption of the Euro on 1 January 2026.

The initiative titled “Pensions in Euro” will be launched on 19 September in the town of Doupnitsa with joint away offices and will cover mainly smaller populated areas in the country. The main objective is to inform and advise pensioners on all matters related to the upcoming change – from the conversion of the pensions into Euro to the identification of counterfeit banknotes so that they do not fall victim to fraudsters.

Leaflets showing Euro banknotes and coins will be distributed at the meetings so that elderly people may become familiar with the new currency (notes and coins) and their elements.

Reports to the Ombudsman’s office show that the currency conversion process causes worry on the part of quite a number of senior citizens.

“It is important that all Bulgarian citizens, especially the elderly people, receive clear, understandable and timely information about the adoption of the Euro and how the Euro will impact their income. This is not just an economic, but also a social program that requires support and trust,” Velislava Delcheva emphasized.

“The NSSI (National Social Security Institute) will be an active partner in this campaign, for the issue of pensions is in the focus of public attention. We want people to be assured and well informed about the way in which their income will be converted and guaranteed,” the NSSI Governor Vesela Karaivanova said in addition.

Detailed information about the locations of the campaign to continue across municipalities and its schedule will be uploaded on the website of the Ombudsman and further communicated by the local authorities and media.

À l'approche de la rentrée scolaire 2025, la Défenseure des droits dresse un bilan préoccupant des obstacles qui entravent encore la réussite éducative des jeunes. Malgré les promesses d'égalité, de nombreux dysfonctionnements persistent dans le système éducatif français, depuis l'orientation au lycée jusqu'aux conditions d'apprentissage, en passant par l'inclusion des élèves en situation de handicap. Ces difficultés structurelles compromettent l'accès effectif à l'éducation pour tous et appellent des réformes en profondeur pour garantir le droit fondamental de chaque enfant à une scolarité réussie.

Trouver sa voie, le parcours du combattant

Les espoirs de réussite et la promesse d’égalité des chances se heurtent dès le lycée aux inégalités criantes en matière d’orientation et à des difficultés dans les procédures d’affectation.

L’orientation subie, obstacle premier à la réussite

L’orientation scolaire est un enjeu central pour l’égalité des chances et constitue un frein originel à la réussite scolaire et professionnelle. Dans son rapport consacré à l’orientation des élèves du secondaire publié en juin dernier, la Défenseure des droits met en lumière de grandes disparités dans l’effectivité de ce droit et de multiples obstacles qui freinent l’accès à une orientation choisie et éclairée. 

Dans ce rapport, la Défenseure des droits appelle à une véritable reconnaissance du droit à l’orientation et y formule plusieurs recommandations pour garantir un accompagnement adapté, lisible et équitable pour tous les élèves.

Ces difficultés d'orientation se prolongent malheureusement par des dysfonctionnements majeurs dans les procédures d'affectation, laissant chaque année des milliers d'élèves dans l'incertitude.

Dysfonctionnement et opacité des dispositifs d’affectation

Cette année encore, de nombreux élèves peinent à poursuivre leur scolarité au lycée en raison d'un manque chronique de places disponibles. Il s’agit de collégiens rencontrant des difficultés pour s’inscrire en classe de seconde, en particulier dans la voie professionnelle, d’élèves de seconde sans réponse d’affectation en classe de première ou encore d’élèves de terminale ayant échoué à l’examen du baccalauréat et qui ont rencontré des difficultés pour redoubler dans leur lycée d’origine. Tous les ans, de nombreux lycéens sont dans l’incertitude à la fin du mois de juillet. Un tour d’affectation est organisé début septembre et bon nombre de ces élèves trouvent un établissement mais ils rejoignent leur classe en retard, après des semaines de stress intense.

La situation n’est pas meilleure pour de nombreux élèves ayant obtenu leur baccalauréat et dont l’affectation dépend de Parcoursup et dont les difficultés sont d’autant plus préoccupantes que deux études consacrées à l’université commanditées par le Défenseur des droits en 2024 font état d’obstacles aux recours, notamment pour contester les refus d’admission en licence ou en master depuis l’avènement des plateformes numériques Parcoursup et Monmaster.gouv.

Au-delà des problèmes d'affectation, les jeunes font face à un autre défi majeur : celui de faire valoir leurs droits et d'être entendus au sein même de l'institution scolaire.

Être entendu pour faire valoir ses droits : des freins structurels à la participation des élèves

Plusieurs situations récentes pour lesquelles l’institution a été sollicitée illustrent les difficultés rencontrées par les plus jeunes à se faire entendre au sein de l’école, faute de procédures adaptées dans les établissements et dans les services de l’Éducation nationale, que ce soit pour signaler des faits de violence (décision n°2025-045) ou pour contester des sanctions disciplinaires (décision n°2025-048).

L’article 12 de la Convention internationale des droits de l’enfant prévoit pourtant que tous les enfants ont le droit d’être entendus sur les questions qui les concernent. Ces deux décisions illustrent les difficultés de certains établissements scolaires et services de l’Éducation nationale à rendre ce droit effectif.

Les nombreuses réclamations adressées au Défenseur des droits montrent que le respect de procédures transparentes et contradictoires permettrait d’apaiser les situations, dans le respect des droits de chacun, en garantissant la prise en compte de la parole de l’enfant et en permettant aux enseignants d’être entendus lorsqu’ils sont mis en cause.

Auditionnée par la Commission des affaires culturelles et de l’éducation de l’Assemblée nationale dans le cadre de l’Enquête sur les modalités du contrôle par l’État et de la prévention des violences dans les établissements scolaires, la Défenseure des droits a rappelé que le recueil et de la prise en compte de la parole de l’enfant sont déterminants pour repérer les situations de dangers et d’abus sexuels sur les mineurs.

Cette difficulté à être entendu est particulièrement critique pour les élèves les plus vulnérables, notamment ceux en situation de handicap, dont l'inclusion scolaire reste un défi majeur.

Une inclusion scolaire toujours imparfaite

Le Défenseur des droits dresse un bilan en demi-teinte de la loi de 2005 sur le handicap et les obstacle à la participation des personnes en situation de handicap à la vie sociale se retrouvent naturellement dans les parcours des plus jeunes.
Les enfants et les jeunes en situation de handicap peuvent bénéficier d'un aménagement de leur scolarité grâce à un projet personnalisé de scolarisation (PPS) et les élèves présentant des troubles des apprentissages bénéficient d’un plan d’aménagement personnalisé (PAP), élaborés avec les équipes enseignantes.

Le Défenseur des droits est malgré tout saisi par des élèves qui n’obtiennent pas un aménagement raisonnable de leurs conditions d’apprentissage et d’une compensation effective de leur handicap (Rappel à la loi n°2024-027).

Les élèves en situation de handicap bénéficient également d’un droit à l'aménagement des épreuves d’examen. Le Défenseur des droits est encore saisi par des parents d’élèves dont les demandes ont été refusées et constate que ce droit n’est pas toujours respecté.

Dans un avis au Parlement publié le 5 juin 2025 sur la proposition de loi n°571 visant à « renforcer le parcours inclusif des enfants à besoins éducatifs particuliers », la Défenseure des droits relève que même si des progrès ont été fait pour rendre l’école plus inclusive, des difficultés persistent dans la prise en compte du handicap sur les temps scolaires et périscolaires.

Ces enjeux d'inclusion s'ajoutent aux défis posés par des conditions matérielles souvent inadéquates, qui constituent un obstacle supplémentaire à l'égalité des chances.

Des conditions matérielles sources d’inégalités et d’interruption des enseignements

Dans son dernier rapport annuel sur les droits de l’enfant consacré au droit des enfants à un environnement sain, le Défenseur des droits relève la disparité des bâtiments scolaires et leur inadaptation pour permettre aux élèves d’étudier dans de bonnes conditions lorsque les températures augmentent. Comme nous avons pu le constater en fin de l’année scolaire 2024-2025 lorsque les élèves de certaines régions ont été incités à rester chez eux en raison des trop fortes chaleurs, le dérèglement climatique entraîne un risque de rupture de continuité dans les enseignements.

La Défenseure des droits alerte ainsi sur l’urgence de rénover les établissements scolaires.

Même si les examens semblent encore lointains, il encourage les parents d’élève en situation de handicap à demander dès le début de l’année l’aménagement des épreuves d’examen, afin de bénéficier des délais suffisants pour exercer les recours en cas de refus.
Les juristes du Défenseur des droits sont joignables tout au long de l’année au 09 69 39 00 00 pour toute situation qui entraverait l’accès d’un enfant à l’éducation.