Natisni vsebino

3.1.2. Relations with state bodies and other bodies

Annual Report

3.1.2. Relations with state bodies and other bodies

The ombudsman works with state bodies, local government bodies and statutory authorities at both the preventive/promotional level and the curative level. In the case of the latter, a good cooperation with state bodies and other bodies is reflected by these bodies heeding the ombudsman's proposals and opinions, correct responses to his inquiries and a readiness on the part of the responsible officers for a direct discussion of problems in the area of the protection of human rights.

Working meetings can expand relations with state bodies and other bodies from the curative to the preventive level. At the curative level they speed up movement in addressing issues and enable the faster and better quality exchange of information about problems and possibilities for their solution. They are an opportunity to confront potentially different views on the way to overcome problems. At the preventive level they enable the possibility of drawing up joint strategies for preventing the violation of rights and a joint approach to raising awareness of the respecting of rights both among the employees of the bodies over which the ombudsman has jurisdiction and among the wider public. Preventive discussions enable the removal of ambiguities in specific regulations and/or laws before their adoption and implementation.

As a rule state bodies heed the ombudsman's proposals, opinions and findings relating to the addressing of problems and are ready to take part in discussions. In the case of communication difficulties the ombudsman will turn to public pressure as a last resort, and only after issuing several warnings to the body concerned.

The ombudsman's observations at the July press conference about the ignorance of certain state institutions and the often discriminatory practice of various government offices met with a significant response in the media. He admonished the Ministry of Defence, which was failing to pay conscripts doing civilian service in place of military service and was also late in paying annuities to those injured while doing military service. The ombudsman discussed these open questions with the defence minister in November.

The ombudsman also used the July press conference to draw attention to the ignorant attitude of the spokesperson of the DURS (the national tax office) towards the media and criticised both the DURS and the Ministry of Education, Science and Sport for their chronic lateness in replying to the ombudsman's questions. He was compelled to repeat his reprimand to the latter at the September press conference, where he also outlined the nonobservance of certain laws in the area of education and social security. He managed to get over the deadlock and clear up ambiguities with the minister in December.

Following complaints from various religious communities about the work of the government office for religious communities, the ombudsman had a meeting with the director of the office. Among other things he drew his attention to irregularities in relation to the allocation of funds among religious communities and to the need for equal treatment of all religious communities in Slovenia. He reported on this at the September press conference. In November he warned the government that the provision of budget funds for the social insurance of priests in Slovenia was not legally regulated. To date we have not received information about any drawing up of criteria for the allocation of funds or the legal regulation of the social insurance of priests.

In relation to the attack on the journalist Miro Petek, the ombudsman condemned 'violent methods of polemicising with journalists' and immediately met with representatives of the office of the police directorate in Slovenj Gradec and then with top officials from the Slovene police, headed by the general director. All assured him that they had 'tackled the investigations seriously and thoroughly'. Since after seven months the investigation of the case had still produced no results, the ombudsman lent his support to Association of Journalists of Slovenia in its efforts to obtain a clarification of the circumstances surrounding the attack and through personal contacts called on those responsible to clear up the case and protect the freedom of expression.

In 2001 the ombudsman had several meetings with representatives of the police both in relation to concrete cases and the education of police officers in the area of human rights and the formation of strategies to improve the work of the police. The ombudsman highlighted as a fundamental criterion for the assessment of the work of the police the force's attitude towards violations of human rights in police procedures and above all, whether the police force tolerates violations or whether it is prepared to prevent, discover and punish them. At one of these meetings, at the collegiate body of the general police directorate, police chiefs assured him that in the area of addressing complaints in the future, every complainant whose complaint is considered unjustified will be given a written explanation of the reasons for this decision, and that all the ombudsman's suggestions will be given serious consideration in the day-to-day work of the police.

The ombudsman has kept the public regularly informed of his findings on the work of the police. At the February press conference, for example, the deputy ombudsman Aleš Butala spoke about various cases relating to the police. During the discussion of the reports for 1999 and 2000 the ombudsman drew attention to ineffective complaints procedures and to the increase in violence on the part of law-and-order bodies.

In March the ombudsman met the minister of the interior to talk about the implementation of police powers, the use of coercive measures and complaints procedures, the reform of the state administration, the issue of administrative procedures in the area of administrative internal affairs, the premises-related problems of the asylum centre and the centre for aliens, the work of the administrative inspectorate and other current topics.

In June he drew attention to the ignorance of the Ministry of the Interior which, more than a month after his visit to the deportation centre in Postojna, had done nothing to improve conditions and only began to act after a description of the conditions appeared in the media. A month later the ombudsman was able to inform the public that the regulation of conditions as per the assurances of the general director of the police was in full swing.

During the reading of the annual reports for 1999 and 2000 in the National Assembly the ombudsman warned that in the area of the regulation of the status of aliens too little effort was being made on the part of the ministry in ruling on asylum and citizenship, since although by law the ruling should be made within two months, in reality it takes a year for decisions to be issued. The minister of the interior explained that backlogs in the area of asylum policy and the majority of backlogs in the area of granting citizenship would be removed by the end of 2001.

In 2001 the ombudsman also met representatives of SOVA, the national security and intelligence service. He familiarised himself with the work of the service and discussed current issues.

He had several discussions with his predecessor, now the justice minister, about the operation of the judicial system. He also talked to the president of the Constitutional Court about issues in the area of justice, particularly the duration of judicial procedures.

At the September press conference he drew attention to a number of unlawful practices on the part of judicial bodies in extending security and penal measures – for example detention not covered by a court order and compulsory psychiatric treatment and care in a health care institute. Such practices constitute a violation of the fundamental human right to personal freedom.

During the reading of the reports for 1999 and 2000 in the National Assembly he drew attention to the nonimplementation of the Enforcement of Judgements and Insurance of Claims Act and to the urgent problem of court backlogs which in his opinion do not only arise because the work of the courts is too slow but also because the work of the courts is poor. He also drew attention to the above-average number of cases remanded to the court of first instance.

The ombudsman held a number of discussions with the public prosecutor general about the work of the prosecution service.

During the preparations for the referendum on the amendment to the act regulating the medical treatment of sterility and biomedical fertilisation, the ombudsman met the health minister. In the autumn they discussed the Health Care Act.

At a meeting with the minister for labour, the family and social affairs the ombudsman discussed, among other things, complex issues from the area of employment and unemployment, the work of social services centres and the protection of the rights of children.

With representatives of the Ministry of External Affairs he highlighted the complications suffered at the 'Schengen border' by citizens of Slovenia who had had their passport stolen. He presented his findings at the September press conference.

In direct talks with a number of mayors the ombudsman attempted to resolve certain open questions from the area of local communities.

The ombudsman submitted the Annual Report for 2000 to the president of the National Assembly on 25 May. The president of the National Assembly promised the immediate reading of both the report for 2000 and the report for 1999. The expectation that the National Assembly would hold a thorough discussion of the ombudsman's reports for 1999 and 2000 was also expressed by the president of the republic when the report was submitted. President Kučan expressed his hope that the National Assembly would take into account in its discussion the observations on the state of the protection of human rights made by Amnesty International, the Helsinki Monitor and other civil society organisations, and his belief that other bodies of the republic including the judiciary, the state prosecution service and the police would also wish to discuss the ombudsman's report.

During the reading of the reports in the National Assembly on 28 September the ombudsman thanked the National Assembly for keeping its promise and including the reports of the Human Rights Ombudsman among the priority areas it aimed to tackle. He expressed his belief that the reading of the reports is not merely an action by which a certain task is ticked off and left to rot in a draw until the following year, when the new ombudsman's report once again makes it necessary to express support for human rights. He welcomed the efforts of the government, the internal policy committee and parliament in preparing opinions on the reports and criticised their general and non-binding nature. Both the internal policy committee and the National Assembly supported the ombudsman's proposal for the employment of three experts to work in the area of children's rights and social affairs.

Letno poročilo 2001 - Poglavje 3.1.2.

3.1.2. Odnosi z državnimi in drugimi organi

Z državnimi organi, organi lokalnih skupnosti in nosilci javnihpooblastil varuh sodeluje na obeh ravneh, tako napreventivno/promocijski, kot tudi na kurativni. Na slednji se ustreznosodelovanje z državnimi in drugimi organi kaže v upoštevanju varuhovihpredlogov in mnenj, v korektnem odgovarjanju na njegove poizvedbe in vpripravljenosti odgovornih za neposreden pogovor o problemih s področjavarstva človekovih pravic.


Delovna srečanja pa lahko razširijo odnose z organi s kurativnetudi na preventivno raven. Na kurativni ravni pospešijo premike prirazreševanju problematike in omogočajo hitrejšo in kakovostnejšoizmenjavo informacij o problemih in možnostih za njihovo razreševanje.So priložnost za soočenje morebitnih različnih stališč o načinupremagovanja navedenih problemov. Na preventivni ravni pa omogočajomožnost izdelave skupnih strategij za preprečevanje kršenja pravic inskupen pristop k dvigu zavesti o spoštovanju pravic tako uslužbencevorganov, do katerih ima varuh pristojnosti kot širše javnosti.Preventivni pogovori omogočajo odpravo nejasnosti ob določenihpredpisih in/ali zakonih pred njihovim sprejetjem in implementacijo.


Državni organi praviloma upoštevajo varuhove predloge, mnenja inugotovitve za razrešitev problemov in so pripravljeni na pogovor. Omorebitnih komunikacijskih zastojih z nekaterimi pa varuh po večkratnihopozorilih slednjič izvaja pritisk prek javnosti.


Na odziv medijev so naletela opozorila varuha na julijskinovinarski konferenci o ignoranci nekaterih državnih inštitucij in navelikokrat diskriminatorno prakso različnih vladnih uradov. Okaral je ministrstvo za obrambo,ki nabornikom ni plačevalo civilnega služenja vojaškega roka, prav takopa je z zamudo izplačevalo rente tistim, ki so se pri služenjuvojaškega roka poškodovali. Z ministrom za obrambo se je o odprtihvprašanjih pogovarjal novembra.


Prav tako na julijski konferenci je opozoril še na ignorantski odnos predstavnika Davčne uprave RS do medijev in poleg DURS-a kot kroničnega zamudnika pri odgovarjanju na varuhova vprašanja okrcal še ministrstvo za šolstvo, znanost in šport.Grajo slednjega je moral ponoviti še na novinarski konferenciseptembra, kjer je orisal tudi neizpolnjevanje nekaterih zakonov napodročju šolstva in sociale. Z ministrico sta zastoj in nejasnostiodpravila v decembru.


Varuh se je po pritožbah različnih verskih skupnosti zoper delo Urada vlade za verske skupnosti srečalz direktorjem urada. Med drugim ga je opozoril na nepravilnosti v zveziz razdeljevanjem sredstev med verske skupnosti in na nujno enakovrednoobravnavo vseh verskih skupnosti v Sloveniji, o čemer je septembraobvestil javnost na novinarski konferenci. Novembra pa je vladoopozoril, da zagotavljanje proračunskih sredstev za socialnozavarovanje duhovnikov v Sloveniji ni pravno urejeno.

Informacije o morebitni izdelavi meril za razdelitev sredstev alipravni urejenosti socialnega zavarovanja duhovnikov do danes še nismoprejeli.


Varuh je ob napadu na novinarja Večera Mira Petka obsodil“nasilne metode polemiziranja z novinarji” in setakoj srečal najprej s predstavniki Urada policijske uprave v SlovenjGradcu nato pa še z vodstvom slovenske policije na čelu z generalnim direktorjem policije.Vsi so mu zagotovili, da so se “preiskave lotili resno intemeljito”. Ker po sedmih mesecih še ni bilo nobenihrezultatov o preiskavi omenjenega primera, je pri prizadevanjih zarazjasnitev napada podprl Društvo novinarjev Slovenije, in v osebnihstikih pristojne pozval k razrešitvi primera in varovanju svobodeizražanja.


Varuh se je leta 2001 še večkrat srečal s predstavniki policijetako zaradi reševanja konkretnih primerov in izobraževanja policistov spodročja človekovih pravic kot tudi oblikovanja strategij zaizboljšanje delovanja. Varuh je kot temeljno merilo za ocenjevanje delapolicije izpostavil njen odnos do kršenja človekovih pravic v postopkihpolicije, predvsem pa, ali policija kršitve tolerira oziroma ali jih jepripravljena preprečevati, odkrivati in sankcionirati. Na enem takšnihsrečanj na razširjenem kolegiju policijske uprave mu je vodstvoslovenske policije med drugim zagotovilo, da bodo na področju reševanjapritožb v prihodnje vsakemu pritožitelju, čigar pritožba bo ocenjenakot neupravičena, tudi pisno pojasnjeni razlogi za takšno odločitev inda bodo vse varuhove pobude resno upoštevane pri vsakodnevnem delupolicistov.


O svojih ugotovitvah o delu policije je varuh redno obveščaljavnost. Tako je o različnih primerih s področja policije že nafebruarski novinarski konferenci spregovoril namestnik varuha AlešButala. Varuh pa je ob obravnavi poročil za leti 1999 in 2000 opozorilna neučinkovite pritožbene poti ter na povečevanje nasilja represivnihorganov.


Varuh se je marca z ministrom za notranje zadevepogovarjal o izvrševanju policijskih pooblastil, uporabi prisilnihsredstev in pritožbenih poti, reformi državne uprave, problematikiupravnih postopkov na področju upravnih notranjih zadev, prostorskimproblemom azilnega doma in centra za tujce, delu upravne inšpekcije indrugim aktualnim zadevam.


Junija pa je že opozoril na ignoranco omenjenega ministrstva, kiveč kot mesec dni po njegovem obisku v postojnskem centru zaodstranjevanje tujcev ni storilo ničesar za izboljšanje razmer, poobjavi razmer v medijih pa se je le zganilo. Tako je lahko že mesec dnipozneje javnost obvestil, da je urejanje razmer po zagotovilihgeneralnega direktorja policije v polnem teku.


Varuh je ob obravnavi poročil za leti 1999 in 2000 v državnemzboru opozoril, da so na področju reševanja statusa tujcev prizadevanjaministrstva pri odločanju o azilu in državljanstvu premalo, saj bimorali v skladu z zakoni odločati v dveh mesecih, odločbe pa so izdanešele v letu dni. Minister za notranje zadeve je pojasnil, da bodo dokonca leta 2001 odpravili zaostanke na področju azilne politike tervečino zaostankov na področju dodeljevanja državljanstva.


Varuh se je v letu 2001 srečal tudi s predstavniki Slovenske varnostno-obveščevalne službe (SOVA). Seznanil se je z njihovim delom in se pogovarjal o aktualnih temah.

O delovanju sodnega sistema se je nekajkrat pogovarjal s svojim predhodnikom, zdajšnjim pravosodnim ministrom. S predsednikom ustavnega sodišča pa je spregovoril o problematiki s področja sodstva, zlasti dolgotrajnosti sodnih postopkov.


Septembra pa je na novinarski konferenci javnost opozoril nanekatere nezakonite prakse pravosodnih organov pri podaljševanjuvarnostnih in kazenskih ukrepov, kot sta pripor brez pokritja z odločbosodišča ter obvezno psihiatrično zdravljenje in varstvo v zdravstvenemzavodu - kršenje temeljne človekove pravice do osebne svobode


Ob obravnavi poročil za leti 1999 in 2000 v državnem zboru pa jeopozoril še na neizvajanje zakona o izvršbi in zavarovanju ter napereči problem sodnih zaostankov, ki po njegovem niso samo zaostankizaradi prepočasnega dela sodišč, ampak tudi slabega dela sodišč. Pritem je opozoril na nadpovprečno število zadev, vrnjenih na prvostopnjo.

Z generalno državno tožilko sta se nekajkrat pogovarjala o delu tožilcev.


Varuh se je med pripravami na referendum o noveli zakona ozdravljenju neplodnosti in umetni oploditvi z biomedicinsko pomočjosrečal z ministrom za zdravje, jeseni pa sta govorila o zakonu o zdravstvenem varstvu.


Z ministrom za delo, družino in socialne zadeve sta nasrečanju med drugim spregovorila o kompleksni problematiki s področjazaposlovanja in brezposelnosti, o delu centrov za socialno delo invarovanju pravic otrok.


S predstavniki ministrstva za zunanje zadeve je osvetlilzaplete, ki jih doživljajo državljani Slovenije na t. i. schengenskimeji, če jim je bil kdaj ukraden potni list. Ugotovitve je predstavilna septembrski novinarski konferenci.


Varuh je v neposrednem pogovoru z nekaterimi župani skušal rešiti nekatera odprta vprašanja s področja lokalnih skupnosti.


Varuh se je ob obravnavi poročil 28. 9. v državnem zboruzahvalil, da je ta držal obljubo in poročili Varuha človekovih pravicuvrstil med prednostna področja, s katerimi se bo spoprijel. Izrazil jeprepričanje, da obravnava poročil ni le dejanje, s katerim bomoodkljukali neko nalogo in jo prepustili trohnenju v predalih doprihodnjega leta, ko se bo ob novem varuhovem poročilu spet trebaizreči za podporo človekovim pravicam. Pozdravil je prizadevnost vlade,odbora za notranjo politiko in parlamenta, da so pripravili mnenja oporočilih in okrcal njihovo splošnost in nezavezujočo naravo. Takoodbor za notranjo politiko kot državni zbor pa sta podprla varuhovpredlog za zaposlitev treh strokovnjakov, ki bi delovali na področjupravic otrok in tudi socialnih zadev.

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