Select your language

One of the main reasons for the Observatory's existence, as it is often mentioned, is the fact that the implementation of the institution of the Ombudsman of the Citizen and the Enterprise (for the Municipalities) and the Ombudsman of the Citizen and the Enterprise (for the Regions) has admittedly not been adopted to the expected extent since its establishment with Kallikratis in 2010 until today.

Only one in five municipalities and about half of the regions managed to activate this institution during the 2019-2023 self-governing period. What is the reason for this weak implementation of the institution, especially since it is mandatory?

One of the main reasons that may contribute greatly to this lack of support of the institution by the local government, are some frequent "misunderstandings" around the Ombudsman. These are even reservations or concerns that are often expressed publicly, for example by municipal or regional councillors, when the issue of the supporter arises during meetings of municipal or regional councils.

Thus, as part of the Observatory's effort to contribute in a constructive way to the support of this institution, it publishes a list of frequent "misunderstandings" which it has identified and to which it attempts to give as simple and documented a response as possible. The list of misunderstandings is, of course, not exhaustive and may be supplemented from time to time, but it is already quite representative. Many thanks are due to Mr Christos Panos, Ombudsman of the Citizen and the Enterprise in the Municipality of Ioannina, for his valuable contribution in capturing the answers.

 

“Ombudsman is decorative”

The Citizen and Business Ombudsman is an institution that has existed in Europe since the 1970s. It was established in Greece in 2010. It has the character of an independent authority within the Municipality and has two main responsibilities: On the one hand, the handling through mediation of complaints by citizens and businesses on issues of maladministration by municipal services and on the other hand, the formulation of proposals for the improvement of the services of the Municipality. In practice, it deals not only with maladministration but also with requests and problems of citizens, which are institutionally put to the Municipal Authority by the Supporter and their course is monitored. In this way, the citizen has to address his/her issues to an independent authority, thematically located in his/her Municipality or Region and thus avoids extra-institutional phenomena, such as Rousfeti, "service" etc. which with its proper institutional function is anything but decorative.

Beyond that, the proper institutional function of the institution consists in the role and procedures that the Supporter is called upon to shape, which are not necessarily the same in each Municipality or each Region, as they need to be adapted:

  • available resources
  • the specific circumstances of the local or regional authority concerned;
  • The Reality of Understaffing
  • the personal abilities and background of the person undertaking this mission.

Having mentioned the above, together with the fact that “the supporter is administratively supported by the services of the municipality, which are obliged to provide every possible assistance” (Law 3852/2010, Article 77(3)), it is clear that the ability of the citizen’s supporter to effectively perform his or her work in a municipality depends on a number of factors. Many of them stem from the will of the municipal authority and the administrative services to support the Ombudsman in the performance of his duties.