According to the Ombudsman, from the point of view of the principle of good governance, the government is also obliged to ensure adequate responsiveness and communication in relation to citizens, and it is also obliged to address their complaints. In the Ombudsman's experience, the body's substantive response can often prevent unnecessary further complications, and the absence of such an explanation can strengthen doubts about the correctness of the authority's actions. The conduct of the Prime Minister's office, which did not inform the complainant of its findings despite the request, was therefore not entirely consistent with the principle of good governance. The Ombudsman therefore suggested that they consider the Ombudsman's recommendations arising from this case in their further work.

* * *

A complainant wrote to the Office of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovenia (KPV) due to, in her opinion, the discriminatory behaviour of the Ministry of Public Administration (MJU). In response, she only received a letter from the KPV, in which it asked the MJU for information on the matter. When she had still not received another response after almost six months, she asked for the help of the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia (Ombudsman).

The Ombudsman asked the KPV for an explanation. In its response to the Ombudsman, the KPV took the position that the complainant's letters were dealt with in accordance with legal powers. In view of the content of the letter, the KPV asked the MJU to take a position about the complainant's statements. After re-examining the case, the KPV found that the MJU had provided explanations only to the KPV, but not to the complainant, therefore, after receiving the Ombudsman's inquiry, they forwarded an additional request for information on the status of the case to the MJU.

The MJU informed them that it had received several letters from the complainant and had issued and forwarded all additional explanations and certificates to her. The State Attorney's Office informed the MJU that the complainant had filed a compensation claim. The MJU provided the State Attorney's Office with all of the necessary documentation for the representation of the Republic of Slovenia in the case. The KPV concluded the letter to the Ombudsman by stating that ensuring the independence of institutions and consistent observance of the principle of separation of powers is the basis of the functioning of the rule of law. All potential irregularities or injustices can only be remedied in accordance with regulations and appropriate legal remedies. The Prime Minister of the Republic of Slovenia and his cabinet may not interfere in specific procedures that fall under the jurisdiction of individual administrative bodies or courts. From the explanations of the MJU, it was evident that the case is in the out-of-court phase at the State Attorney's Office, therefore the KPV assessed that the letters addressed by the complainant to the Prime Minister and the KPV were dealt with appropriately and in accordance with their competences.

The Ombudsman accepted the KPV's explanations regarding the actual content of the consideration of the complainant's letters, but at the same time, he believes that it would be right for the KPV to directly inform the complainant about everything stated in the letter to the Ombudsman. From the point of view of the principle of good governance from Article 3 of the Human Rights Ombudsman Act (ZVarCP), the government is also obliged to ensure adequate responsiveness and communication in relation to citizens, and it is also obliged to consider their complaints. In the Ombudsman's experience, the body's substantive response can often prevent unnecessary further complications, while the absence of such an explanation can strengthen doubts about the correctness of the authority's actions.

The Ombudsman concluded the consideration of the complaint with the opinion that the conduct of the KPV, which did not inform the complainant of its findings despite her request, was not entirely consistent with the principle of good governance. The Ombudsman suggested to the KPV that the Ombudsman's recommendations arising from this case be taken into account in further work. 10.2-1/2023