THE FACTS:
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MATTER:
1) On 13 November 2000, I sent a complaint to the Court of Justice of the European Communities regarding the choice of Mr. Jacob Söderman as the Ombudsman in July 1995 and studying of incapacity thereof.
The above-mentioned incapacity was due to the fact that an individual complaint against him was pending and being officially studied by the Human Rights Committee of the Council of the European Union, dated 3 June 1994 and registered in the Committee on 26 January 1995 (admissibility).
I received a decision from the Principal Administrator of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, Mr. H.A. Rühl, who in a letter dated 23 November 2000 briefly stated:
"Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Communities notifies you on reception of your letter dated 13 November 2000. Unfortunately, he must notify You that the Court of Justice of the European Communities does not have authority to begin studying matter of its own accord. Should You wish, You may contact the European Parliament who named Mr. Jacob Söderman to this position."
2) Based on the recommendation by the Court of Justice of the European Communities, I sent an appeal to the European Parliament on 1 December 2000 requesting the President of the Parliament to issue an inquiry on the above-mentioned issue as well as study whether Mr. Jacob Söderman was incapacitated for his position when an individual complaint against him was being studied and had been officially registered by the Human Rights Committee (26320/95 Laakso v. - Finland).
3) Due to several actions taken, I found that my issue did not receive a genuinely independent and impartial handling: therefore, I sent a letter to the chairperson of the European Commission, Mr. Romano Prodi on 12 March 2001. In the meantime, I received an answer, number 201999, on handling of my appeal from the Principal Administrator of the European Parliament, Mr. Helmut Betz on 4 April 2001.
In this letter, Mr. Helmut Betz stated that "the appeal has been entered into our register as number 294/2001" as well as requested me to notify should I wish to "oppose public handling of the appeal".
Next, the Chairperson of the Commission answered me with a letter on 2 Apil 2001 thanking me of my letter as well as stating that "it will be included in my correspondence register"...
Approximately month after that letter had arrived, I checked the correspondence register of Mr. Romano Prodi in order to find whole of my matter on 17 April 2001 included there under the number "A (2001) 852510" and with the ID of "LAAKSO E.K./SANS ORGANISME PLAINTE CONTRE JACOB SODERMAN".
In the meantime, I had made several requests about the advancement of my appeal in the Committee of petitions but received no answer to my requests.
5) Chairperson of the Committee of Petitions, Mr. Nino Gemelli sent me a decision in a letter dated 8 June 2001 which was his personal statement, that is not a collegial decision of the Committee of Petitions. In this decision, Mr. Gemelli stated briefly that: "your letter has been handled as a request for information regarding the methods applied by the European Parliament on naming the Ombudsman in July 1995. Thus, it is not an appeal despite it having previously classified as such"...
I could only wonder how my appeal dated on 1 December 2000 and delivered to the European Parliament could be handled as "request for information" already in July 1995?
6) Due to the events described above, I delivered a settlement request to Mr. Nino Gemelli by post on 24 August 2001 but received no answer.
I further appealed to the Chairperson of the Commission, Mr. Romano Prodi with a letter on 27 August 2001, and received an answer, number SG(2001)D/856730, on 14 September 2001.
7) After having contacted several parties several times and sending letter to the Committee of Petitions, I received a letter, number 106709, from Mr. Nino Gemelli on 19 March 2002 where Mr. Gemelli still pleaded the previous decision of not to take on and study the incapacity question of Mr. Jacob Söderman which had been consciously and incorrectly classified as a "request for information", not as an appeal which it was first classified as and which its legal status was.
Above, I have strived to briefly describe the arduous legal struggle against by biological father Mr. Jacob Söderman who retired in the middle of his term of office from his position as the Ombudsman of the European Parliament on 31 March 2003. The secession was based on a resignation delivered to the chairperson of the European Parliament on 16 April 2002.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF MATTER:
1) On 13 November 2000, I sent a complaint to the Court of Justice of the European Communities regarding the choice of Mr. Jacob Söderman as the Ombudsman in July 1995 and studying of incapacity thereof.
The above-mentioned incapacity was due to the fact that an individual complaint against him was pending and being officially studied by the Human Rights Committee of the Council of the European Union, dated 3 June 1994 and registered in the Committee on 26 January 1995 (admissibility).
I received a decision from the Principal Administrator of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, Mr. H.A. Rühl, who in a letter dated 23 November 2000 briefly stated:
"Registrar of the Court of Justice of the European Communities notifies you on reception of your letter dated 13 November 2000. Unfortunately, he must notify You that the Court of Justice of the European Communities does not have authority to begin studying matter of its own accord. Should You wish, You may contact the European Parliament who named Mr. Jacob Söderman to this position."
2) Based on the recommendation by the Court of Justice of the European Communities, I sent an appeal to the European Parliament on 1 December 2000 requesting the President of the Parliament to issue an inquiry on the above-mentioned issue as well as study whether Mr. Jacob Söderman was incapacitated for his position when an individual complaint against him was being studied and had been officially registered by the Human Rights Committee (26320/95 Laakso v. - Finland).
3) Due to several actions taken, I found that my issue did not receive a genuinely independent and impartial handling: therefore, I sent a letter to the chairperson of the European Commission, Mr. Romano Prodi on 12 March 2001. In the meantime, I received an answer, number 201999, on handling of my appeal from the Principal Administrator of the European Parliament, Mr. Helmut Betz on 4 April 2001.
In this letter, Mr. Helmut Betz stated that "the appeal has been entered into our register as number 294/2001" as well as requested me to notify should I wish to "oppose public handling of the appeal".
Next, the Chairperson of the Commission answered me with a letter on 2 Apil 2001 thanking me of my letter as well as stating that "it will be included in my correspondence register"...
Approximately month after that letter had arrived, I checked the correspondence register of Mr. Romano Prodi in order to find whole of my matter on 17 April 2001 included there under the number "A (2001) 852510" and with the ID of "LAAKSO E.K./SANS ORGANISME PLAINTE CONTRE JACOB SODERMAN".
In the meantime, I had made several requests about the advancement of my appeal in the Committee of petitions but received no answer to my requests.
5) Chairperson of the Committee of Petitions, Mr. Nino Gemelli sent me a decision in a letter dated 8 June 2001 which was his personal statement, that is not a collegial decision of the Committee of Petitions. In this decision, Mr. Gemelli stated briefly that: "your letter has been handled as a request for information regarding the methods applied by the European Parliament on naming the Ombudsman in July 1995. Thus, it is not an appeal despite it having previously classified as such"...
I could only wonder how my appeal dated on 1 December 2000 and delivered to the European Parliament could be handled as "request for information" already in July 1995?
6) Due to the events described above, I delivered a settlement request to Mr. Nino Gemelli by post on 24 August 2001 but received no answer.
I further appealed to the Chairperson of the Commission, Mr. Romano Prodi with a letter on 27 August 2001, and received an answer, number SG(2001)D/856730, on 14 September 2001.
7) After having contacted several parties several times and sending letter to the Committee of Petitions, I received a letter, number 106709, from Mr. Nino Gemelli on 19 March 2002 where Mr. Gemelli still pleaded the previous decision of not to take on and study the incapacity question of Mr. Jacob Söderman which had been consciously and incorrectly classified as a "request for information", not as an appeal which it was first classified as and which its legal status was.
Above, I have strived to briefly describe the arduous legal struggle against by biological father Mr. Jacob Söderman who retired in the middle of his term of office from his position as the Ombudsman of the European Parliament on 31 March 2003. The secession was based on a resignation delivered to the chairperson of the European Parliament on 16 April 2002.
Vastaukset
Vanhimmat
Ei vielä vastauksia
Aloittaja odottaa vastauksia. Kerro oma näkemyksesi ensimmäisenä.