And why not set up a “Citizens’ Ombudsman”?
(B2) The Europe of results, concrete Europe, the Europe of citizens, the words are all on the lips of European leaders. Unfortunately, the results are still mixed.
The good will is present, it is undeniable, and some projects have been sketched out. But does Europe really have all the levers, starting with the essential one of being able to respond to the concrete problems that affect citizens confronted with a European question, in their own country or in another.
Reimbursement of care or allocation of scholarships, non-recognition of driving licenses or diplomas, non-compliance with European social standards, very often, it is only a question of " small » problems, which do not necessarily result in a clear breach by the State or States concerned. The texts have been transcribed; they are simply not applied or poorly applied. Sometimes there is ill will on the part of the administrations responsible for applying European regulations, sometimes a misunderstanding or poor knowledge of the texts, or else each State concerned passes the buck to itself, considering that the problem lies with the other. Europe should not, however, be mistaken. By not solving these small problems of the everyday life of Europeans, it leaves the impression of a " Brussels » removed from day-to-day concerns or whose decisions are not applied. It also promotes, in reverse, a bad image of European mobility which, more than anything, discourages potential candidates for departure.
Administrative hassles, delays in papers, differences in analyzes in social rights should be tracked down with as much relentlessness, the abuses of the administrations made public, especially in terms of social benefits, just as breaches of competition rules are currently tracked .
Of course, wise aesthetes will answer: there is already the infringement procedure and citizens can file a complaint with the Commission. But that cannot be enough. In addition to the fact that this procedure is very cumbersome, lasts several years, it often does not concretely resolve the problem of the citizen or citizens concerned. Moreover, it takes place in a certain opacity. Formal notices, even reasoned opinions or referrals to the Court of Justice, are not all published. This undermines their pedagogical effect of public sanction.
It would therefore be necessary to show ingenuity, a new imagination to resolve certain questions where the question of pure law – Who is right? Who's wrong ? – can give way to the interests of the European citizen. It would take an authority capable of gauging whether the complaint is justified and seeking an equitable remedy, capable also of exercising its legitimacy. An authority that could make a phone call to the administration concerned, or to its political leader, to demonstrate the futility of such a position. And a public report that can, each year, highlight repetitive facts and " success stories which could certainly contribute to the better application of Community regulations.
It remains to be seen how to set up this "Citizens' Ombudsman". Does this mean strengthening the European Ombudsman, who is competent only in the event of the malfunctioning of the Community institutions? Or should an institution seize this void and set up an appropriate body: this would be the role of the Commission, but why not of Parliament? Is there a need for legal formalization? heavy », by the fundamental treaties? Or would a simple interinstitutional agreement, or even a simple modification of the internal regulations of the institution concerned, suffice? Inevitably, work must begin.
