The Defender’s main findings in the 2nd Quarter of 2016

In the 2nd quarter, the Defender examined one of the aspects of delays in court proceedings. These are sometimes prolonged due to delays in the preparation of expert reports, which the court needs in certain cases to make a decision. The Defender inquired into this issue in connection with a case of the body of social and legal protection of children (BSLPC) acting as the guardian ad litem. She informed the relevant BSLPC on what possibilities it had in case of failure to comply with the term of preparation of the expert reports. The relevant municipal authority accepted our recommendation. It issued guidelines for its employees, stipulating how they should proceed when submitting complaints against delays in court proceedings and when filing a motion to set a deadline for the performance of a procedural act.

When issuing an order to participate in the initial meeting with a mediator, the authorities are obliged to make decisions based on the necessity of mediation, not based on the parents’ financial background. In case of destitute parents, the mediation can be paid from the state budget, either from the budgetary chapter for the social and legal protection of children or by means of assistance in material need. The Defender has encountered such case in Prague where an appellate authority annulled the mediation order because one of the parents could not afford it. The authority adopted all the remedies she proposed.

The Defender inquired into the case of a complainant who challenged the procedure of establishment and definition of learning support assistants’ responsibilities in an educational facility (an after-school group). She also argued that there were problems in funding their activities. Following an inquiry, the Defender concluded that the Regional Authorities interpreted the relevant provisions of the Schools Act properly. As the funding of learning support assistants (including in the after-school groups) will be coordinated with effect as of 1 September 2016, the Defender has concluded the inquiry without issuing any reprimand to the relevant authority.

By means of repeated visits, the Defender has inquired into the conditions of institutional and protective education in the Educational Institution and Children’s Home in Chrastava. The Public Defender of Rights already visited this facility in the past (in 2006 by Otakar Motejl and in 2012 by Pavel Varvařovský). With regard to the serious findings made during the visit of the facility, specifically that none of the recommendations submitted by the Defender’s predecessors had been implemented in the last ten years, the Defender has, in accordance with Section 21a (4) of the Public Defender of Rights Act, approached the founder of the facility, the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, and requested a remedy.