Page 196 - kdk-sempozyum-3

institution I have the honor to preside over and that is obviously part of
the important activities within the competence of virtually all institutions
of mediation or ombudsmanship. In principle we all constitute a
significant source of proposals collaborating our intermediary action
between the residents of our country whether domestic or foreign and
the various companies of the public administration.

Failing to have a decision-making power like the judgments of
administrative tribunals with the authority of res judicata. Our constant
concern is to reconcile the positions in order to reach the best possible
arrangement while supporting in priority the weaker party at least
theoretically facing a better structured body because the latter is
relying on a strong legal and regulatory arsenal and human resources
most of the time qualified. For this purpose we have a number of
persuasive means which unfortunately are not always convincing
while the quantitative and qualitative level of satisfaction of our
common efforts is on the whole respectable yet we still need to show
imagination in case of procrastination or delays through proposing
and recommending an objective solution to the outstanding issue.
Allow me to open a parenthesis to recall some differences between the
proposal and their recommendation which are often confused in the
founding texts governing interventions. In my view proposing means
suggesting and recommending a solution. It is somehow a more or
less amicable and almost neutrality of the ombudsman and gives the
administration the option to accept it or not.

As for the recommendation even if it takes a nonbinding character
further to engage ombudsman to back up its attitude through
insisting much an encouraging the administration to implement such
recommendation therefore to recommend is obviously stronger
than propose. The recommendation is generally made for major and
recurrent cases which convince the mediator of the need to invite the
administration to reconsider its procedures or even the legitimacy of
its sections and decisions also.

Another additional feature seems useful to be mentioned by way of
illustration. We talk about decisions whose number is usually more
important than which fall within the internal organization of the
institution in question particularly when it decides to close a case if it
finds upon completion of its processing that is outside its jurisdiction

rd
194 | 3 INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTIONS