Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Go to Source

Made in accordance with Article 3(6) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman[1]

The background to the complaint

1. The case mainly concerns the Commission’s general tendency to hesitate to grant public access to documents that concern ongoing investigations about possible infringements of EU law by Member States. EU citizens living in Denmark had the impression that, within its policy field, the Commission’s Directorate-General for the Environment (‘DG Environment’) adopted a more open practice around the years 2006-2007. When DG Environment subsequently reverted to the Commission’s above-mentioned tendency, these citizens asked for justifications and suggest
Go to Source

Made in accordance with Article 3(6) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman[1]

The background to the complaint

1. One of the tasks of the European Aviation Safety Agency (‘EASA’) is to provide expert advice to the European Commission on drafting new legislation in its field of activities, notably in relation to the implementation of Regulation 216/2008 on common rules in the field of aviation (‘the Basic Regulation’)[2]. Before EASA submits an ‘opinion’ to the Commission proposing an amendment to a regulation, it publishes a “Notice of Proposed Amendment” (‘NPA’) for public consultation. This is in accordance with
Go to Source

Made in accordance with Article 3(6) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman[1]

The background to the complaint

1. The case concerns the Commission’s general tendency to hesitate to grant public access to documents that concern ongoing investigations about possible infringements of EU law by Member States. EU citizens living in Denmark were under the impression that, within its policy field, the Commission’s Directorate-General for the Environment (DG Environment) adopted a more open practice around the years 2006-2007. When DG Environment subsequently reverted to the Commission’s above-mentioned tendency, these citizens asked for justifications and suggested
Go to Source

Allegation(s)

ECHA failed properly to handle the complainant’s request for access to the declarations of conflict of interests, which were submitted by the members of the selection boards.

Claim(s)

ECHA should give access to the requested documents.

Go to Source