07 June 2011
When can I ask help from the Ombudsman?
When can I ask help from the Ombudsman?
The assistance or intervention from the Ombudsman can seek every citizen of the Republic of Macedonia and a foreign citizen (personally or through an authorized person) when he assesses that one of his constitutional or legal rights has been violated by the acts or activities of the organs of the state administration and other organs and organizations with public authorities.
The protection of the rights before the Ombudsman can be pursued after a citizen previously turned to (filed a petition, claim, sought assistance, intervention, or other activity) an authorized organ or organization, and said organ or organization made an act or didn’t make an act, undertook, that is, did not undertake any appropriate action.
The proceeding before the Ombudsman is initiated by the filing of a petition (complaint, appeal) that can be delivered personally at the Ombudsman’s office, by mail, orally - recorded at the Ombudsman’s Office, by fax, or e-mail.
The Ombudsman can start the proceedings at his own initiative; however, requisite for the continuation of the proceedings is the consent of the citizen whose constitutional or legal right has been violated.
The Ombudsman intervenes when
- individual rights of citizens have been violated through the acts and activities of the organs of the state administration and other organs and organizations with public authorities;
- when the responsible persons or other civil servants that handle the petitions of the citizens enacted administrative acts, such as resolutions, decisions, statements, certificates, opinions, etc., by means of which they purposefully or accidentally erroneously ascertained a factual situation, misapplied laws, violated administrative or other proceedings;
- undertook activities by means of which they arbitrarily, bureaucratically, improperly, and inhumanely treated the citizens;
- did not handle the petitions, or made positive decisions upon the petitions without any legal grounds for it;
- delayed the proceedings;
- did not involve interested parties into the proceedings;
- cruelly and degradingly played with the petitioner sending him from one office to another for matters and gathering of evidence that they themselves could have provided themselves;
- did not enforce executive and final acts and did not act upon the guidelines of the appellate and trial organs.