Na prośbę zgłoszoną w komentarzu zamieszczam ten komunikat Europejskiego Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich w sprawie:
"The complaint concerns (a) the evaluation and rejection of a scientific
proposal made in response to a call for proposals under the 7th EC
Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and
Demonstration Activities and (b) the subsequent rejection of the
complainant's appeal."
Rzecznik stwierdza m.in., że:
"39. Finally, with regard to point (ii), namely, the need to protect the objectivity and impartiality of selection procedures, the Ombudsman refers, by analogy, to Article 6 of Annex III to the Staff Regulations, which establishes that the "proceedings" of the selection board (in open competitions) shall be secret. According to established EU case-law, this secrecy was introduced with a view to guaranteeing the independence of selection boards and the objectivity of their proceedings, by protecting them from all external interference and pressure. Observance of this secrecy therefore precludes the disclosure of the views adopted by individual members of selection boards[15]. As the Ombudsman has already had the opportunity to state[16], however, the right to keep the individual views of selection board members secret is not the same as keeping their identities secret. Indeed, the established practice has been to disclose the names of selection board members. Given the interpretation of the Court of Justice of the EU concerning the rationale behind the secrecy provision, the Ombudsman's view, in case 2586/2010/(ML)TN, was that it does not make any sense to try to keep the identity of examiners secret. The Ombudsman's view is that this analysis applies, by analogy, in the case at hand.
40. The Ombudsman will therefore make a further remark, inviting the Agency to reflect on the possibility of releasing the names of evaluators in the future."
całość tu:
mój komentarz:
nie wiem jaką moc oddziaływania ma rzecznik, bo stwierdzenie końcowe "inviting the Agency to
reflect on the possibility of releasing the names of evaluators in the
future" praktycznie nie znaczy nic...
michał żmihorski
