Priporočilo: Drugostopenjska odločba Zavoda za pokojninsko in invalidsko zavarovanje Slovenije (ZPIZ) je bila po posredovanju Varuha človekovih pravic Republike Slovenije (Varuh) »okvirno« izdana v štirimesečnem zakonskem roku, je pa bil štirimesečni rok za izdajo odločbe prekoračen v odločanju na prvi stopnji. Kljub ponovnemu opozorilu o pomembnosti ustrezne obrazložitve odločb niti drugostopenjska odločba ZPIZ ni bila ustrezno obrazložena, temveč se je zgolj sklicevala na mnenje izvedenske komisije II. stopnje, ki pa ni sestavni del odločbe. Varuh je ZPIZ že večkrat opozoril na nujnost ustrezne obrazložitve odločb, vendar ustrezne spremembe prakse doslej žal še ni zaznati.

Priporočilo: The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia believes that rights from Articles 14 and 56 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia would be violated if, due to medical problems, one of the pupils, unlike other pupils with the same problems, could not participate in a school residential trip solely due to a lack of clarity on how the mandatory presence of an additional escort of a child would be financed. The Ombudsman’s quick intervention in such a case probably prevented the infringement of the pupil’s rights and the child was able to participate in the school residential trip.

Priporočilo: The Ombudsman considered a complaint in which the complainant criticised the City Municipality of Ljubljana (MOL) for not deciding on his applications in connection with entry into specific procedures for issuing permits for temporary excessive noise pollution and also his proposal for the renewal of a certain procedure. The accusations turned out to be well-founded. The Ombudsman identified the MOL's actions as an unjustified delay in the process, since it took more than two years and eight months to decide on the proposal for a renewal of the process, and it did not explain or justify its actions in any way. At the same time, the MOL did not decide on any of the complainant's applications for entry into the proceedings, thus violating the complainant's right to a legal remedy and legal protection, calling into question the realisation of the principle of the rule of law and potentially jeopardising the complainant's right to a healthy living environment. The MOL did not accept the Ombudsman's (re)proposal to invite persons whose legal interests could be affected to participate in the procedures for issuing such permits, in accordance with the stipulation of Article 44 of the ZUP, and consistently ensure that all those whose rights or legal benefits the issued permit could affect are involved in the procedure. As a result, the Ombudsman informed the Administrative Inspection of the findings.

Priporočilo: The Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia believes that the Pension and Disability Insurance Institute of Slovenia could, in declaratory proceedings in which this is possible, instead of evidence with an expert body, conduct evidence with a witness or other means of evidence, thus shortening the time taken to make decisions on disability insurance rights. The Institute rejected the position of the Ombudsman. Since the Institute did not exhaust all the possibilities for reducing the backlog in asserting disability insurance rights, the Ombudsman judged that it was not acting in accordance with the principle of good management.