October 15, 2013
The EU Ombudman Emily O’Reilly has barely got her feet under her desk, but has indicated her approach.
In case 814/2010/JF, finally decided in 2012 the EU Ombudsman found the European Commission guilty of maladministration and requested an independent audit into EURSC, European Schools.
A bitter Commission sought to defend the case and threw their best arguments at the EU Ombudsman. These arguments were rejected.
Since then the European Commission openly admit they are disobeying the EU Ombudsman ruling as they continue to disagree. They have not raised any new arguments that were not aired in the case itself prior to the Decision.
In a written ruling yesterday the EU Ombudsman refused to take any further action on the basis there are “no grounds” for further inquiry. Is deliberate anarchic disobedience not sufficient grounds? Is continued falling standards, the matter at issue in the 2010 case, not grounds? It would appear that after the Decision in April 2012 the European Commission sent some follow up to the EU Ombudsman in July 2012. This follow up has not been disclosed under Freedom of Information requests. Can this be a legitimate ground on which to base a denial of citizens rights?
Worrying times for those who value the role of an effective EU Ombudsman. Are wee faced with a puppet EU Ombudsman, doing the bidding of the Institutions?
More to follow..
Author : urbanexposed