Maladministration in how Frontex deals with certain access to documents requests (European Ombudsman)

The European Ombudsman found maladministration in how the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) deals with access to documents requests that it considers imprecise or that concern a large number of documents or very long documents.

Specifically, the Ombudsman found it problematic that when Frontex believes a ‘fair solution’ is necessary in response to a large access request, it decides not to apply the statutory time limit for the request until after a fair solution has been found. The Ombudsman also criticised Frontex’s practice of sometimes suspending the statutory time limit for dealing with requests it considers imprecise. She has recommended Frontex discontinue these practices.

The Ombudsman opened an own-initiative inquiry to look into how the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) deals with requests for public access to documents. The inquiry stemmed from information raised in a complaint to the Ombudsman about systematic delays and other issues in how Frontex handles public access requests.

The Ombudsman's inquiry found issues with two practices used by Frontex when dealing with requests that it considers imprecise or that concern a large amount of documents or large documents. (i) When a request concerns a large amount of documents or very large documents, and Frontex tries to find a ‘fair solution’ in accordance with the EU legislation on public access to documents (Regulation 1049/2001) Frontex decides not to apply the statutory time-limit for dealing with request until after a fair solution has been found. (ii) Where Frontex considers that a request is imprecise, it may also decide to suspsend the statutory time-limit for dealing with the request. 

The Ombudsman considered that this amounts to maladministration and made a recommendation to Frontex that it discontinue the practices. (source: ombudsman.europa.eu/ photo: freepik.com)

Comments

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Graduate Programme 2024 for EU Nationals in European Central Bank

The Lawyer's right to refuse the defense of an accused person for ethical reasons

First judgment of the ECHR: Lawless v. Ireland

Gigantic fine for unfair practices imposed on Booking.com by the Competition Authority of Hungary

The name Pablo Escobar may not be registered as an EU trade mark

Nepotism and favouritism in the legal profession