Natisni vsebino

2.10. Other matters

Annual Report 1997

OTHER MATTERS

Into this area we place those complaints which cannot be placed in any of the defined areas. They are generally complaints which the ombudsman cannot accept for processing because it is clear from the available data and circumstances that they do not involve a breach of human rights or other irregularity. With this type of complaint we usually merely advise the complainant how he should try and solve his problem. Other matters also include complaints which are incomplete and for that reason cannot be dealt with. With such complaints we advise the complainant to complete his complaint if he wishes it to be dealt with by the ombudsman. A large number of the complaints which fall into this area are those which are sent to us for information only.

In 1997 we received 517 complaints which could not be classified into any of ours of work. If we compare the number of complaints received in 1997 with the number received in 1996 we see that their number has increased by 26 per cent.

Individual complaints show us that the individuals who turn to the ombudsman are for the most part well acquainted with his powers but nevertheless wish to acquaint him with their problems. There are a fair number of complaints relating to various types of disputes arising from civil law situations (property disputes, border disputes, inheritance disputes, disputes between individuals and banks, tradesmen and other civil persons). This group of complaints also includes those where a court has already made a final judgement on the dispute but the individual does not want to submit to the decision of the court. Although the ombudsman does not have powers to deal with complaints of this type, we nevertheless try to encourage the complainants to solve the problems in a peaceful and conciliatory way. We do find that often relations between individuals in these disputes are so damaged that there is a danger of an arbitrary conflict settlement. For this reason we treat these complaints carefully even though they are outside our powers.

We dealt similarly with complaints regarding disputes between individuals and banks. The substance of the complaint was in the majority of cases the level of loan repayments or a temporary inability to pay owing to specific circumstances such as the loss of a job. We generally advised these complainants to try and reach a suitable agreement with the bank given that they have not retracted their payment liability to the bank.

We also received several complaints relating to disputes between invividuals and societies (such as hunting clubs). These tend to be cases where an individual has been expelled from a society because of a breach of internal rules and is thus prevented from further involvement in the activity which is only carried out within the context of on organised society activity. As we understand from the complaints, the complainants are convinced that their expulsion from the society constitutes a breach of basic human rights, and they therefore expect the ombudsman to interviene. Given that the disputes involve the relationship between individuals and civil law institutions, we explained to the ombudsman’s powers to the individuals and suggested that they should enforce the protection of their rights within the procedures envisages by the internal rules of the society, or otherwise by means of an appropriate civil suit at the competent court.

Still within this area, we also dealt with complaints relating to events during the Second World War. These complaints tended to be fairly diverse in content. Some complainants expected to be able to claim damages or specific rights under the Law on Rectifying Injustices as a result of events they suffered during the Second World War. For example we received one complaint where the individual concerned had lost his father during the Second World War and wanted to find out whether he was entitled to any kind of compensation. There was also a similar complaint from a widow who had lost her husband during the Second World War. We concluded complaints of this type with an explanation to the complainants that they involved events which happened during the Second World War and that there was no possibility of exercising specific rights under the Law on Rectifying Injustices since this law does not cover the period of the Second World War. The law in fact governs the right to the payment of damages and the rights deriving from pensions and invalidity insurance to former political prisoners and the relatives of people killed after the War. We made a similar response to complainants who wanted to assert specific rights on the basis of the Law on Rectifying Injustices because of the chicanery of the previous administration. These involve cases where the complainants claim that they were thwarted because of their beliefs. The most frequent example given is unemployment in the period of full employment or the unjustified loss of employment.

 

Letno poročilo 1997 - Poglavje 2.10.

OSTALE ZADEVE

V to področje razvrščamo tiste pobude, ki jih ni mogoče razvrstiti v nobeno od opredeljenih področij. Gre praviloma za pobude, ki jih varuh ne more vzeti v obravnavo, ker iz razpoložljivih podatkov in okoliščin nedvoumno izhaja, da ne gre za kršitev človekovih pravic ali drugo nepravilnost. Pri tovrstnih pobudah praviloma le svetujemo pobudniku, kako naj poskuša rešiti svoj problem. Med ostale zadeve uvrščamo tudi pobude, ki so nepopolne in jih zato ni mogoče obravnavati. Pri teh pobudah predlagamo pobudniku, da naj dopolni svojo pobudo, če želi, da bo pobuda obravnavana pri varuhu. Velik del pobud, ki sodijo v to področje, so tudi tiste, ki so nam poslane v vednost.

V letu 1997 smo prejeli 518 pobud, ki jih ni bilo mogoče razvrstiti v katero od področij dela. Če primerjamo število prejetih pobud v letu 1997 s številom tistih v letu 1996, ugotavljamo, da se je njihovo število povečalo za 26 odstotkov.

Iz posameznih pobud ugotavljamo, da posamezniki, ki se obračajo na varuha, večinoma dobro poznajo njegove pristojnosti, a ga vseeno želijo seznaniti s svojim problemom. Tako so dokaj pogoste pobude, ki se nanašajo na različne vrste sporov iz civilnopravnih razmerij (premoženjski spori, mejni spori, dedni spori, spori posameznikov z bankami, obrtniki in drugimi civilnimi osebami). V to skupino pobud spadajo tudi tiste, o katerih je sodišče že odločilo o sporu s pravnomočno sodbo, pa se posameznik noče sprijazniti z odločitvijo sodišča. Čeprav varuh nima možnosti za obravnavo tovrstnih pobud, skušamo vseeno pobudnike spodbuditi k reševanju problemov na miren in poravnalni način. Ugotavljamo namreč, da so dostikrat odnosi med posamezniki v teh sporih tako načeti, da obstaja nevarnost samovoljnega konfliktnega reševanja. Zato tudi te pobude, čeprav nimamo pristojnosti, pazljivo obravnavamo.

Podobno smo obravnavali tudi pobude glede sporov med posamezniki in bankami. Vsebina sporov je bila v večini primerov višina zneska za plačilo najetega posojila pri banki ali pa trenutna plačilna nezmožnost pobudnika zaradi določenih okoliščin; na primer izgube zaposlitve. Tem pobudnikom smo praviloma svetovali, naj poskušajo doseči ustrezen dogovor z banko glede na to, da ponavadi niso oporekali obveznosti plačila banki.

Prejeli smo tudi več pobud v zvezi s spori med posamezniki in društvi (na primer z lovskimi družinami). Gre za primere, ko je posameznik zaradi kršitev internih pravil izključen iz društva in mu je zaradi tega po izključitvi onemogočeno nadaljnje ukvarjanje z dejavnostjo, ki se izvaja samo v okviru organizirane društvene dejavnosti. Kot razberemo iz pobud, so pobudniki prepričani, da so jim zaradi izključitve iz društev kršene temeljne človekove pravice, in pričakujejo varuhovo posredovanje. Glede na to, da gre za razmerje med posamezniki in civilnopravnimi osebami, smo pobudnikom pojasnili varuhove pristojnosti ter jih napotili, da naj uveljavijo varstvo svojih pravic v okviru postopkov, ki so predvideni na podlagi internih pravil društev, oziroma z ustrezno civilno tožbo pri pristojnem sodišču.

Na tem področju smo obravnavali tudi pobude, ki se nanašajo na dogodke med drugo svetovno vojno. Za pobude je značilno, da so bile po vsebini dokaj raznovrstne. Nekateri pobudniki so pričakovali, da bodo lahko uveljavili odškodnino ali pa določene pravice po zakonu o popravi krivic (ZPKri) zaradi dogodkov, ki so jih pretrpeli med drugo svetovno vojno. Tako smo prejeli pobudo nekoga, ki je med drugo svetovno vojno izgubil očeta in ki je želel izvedeti, ali mu pripada kakšna odškodnina. Podobna je tudi pobuda vdove, ki je prav tako med drugo svetovno vojno izgubila moža. Tovrstne pobude smo zaključevali s pojasnili pobudnikom, da gre za dogodke, ki so se zgodili med drugo svetovno vojno in da tako ni možnosti za uveljavitev določenih pravic po zakonu o popravi krivic, ker le-ta ne zajema časa med drugo svetovno vojno. ZPKri namreč ureja pravico do povrnitve škode in pravice iz pokojninskega in invalidskega zavarovanja nekdanjim političnim zapornikom in svojcem po vojni pobitih oseb. Podobno smo odgovarjali pobudnikom, ki so želeli uveljaviti določene pravice na podlagi zakona o popravi krivic zaradi šikaniranja prejšnje oblasti. Gre za primere, ko pobudniki navajajo, da so bili zaradi svojega prepričanja onemogočeni. Največkrat navajajo kot primer brezposelnost v času polne zaposlenosti ali pa neupravičeno izgubo zaposlitve.

Legal information   |   Privacy   |   Contact Made by: Nova Vizija d.d.