Europe Day - 9 May: The EU Ombudsman and Ombudsmen from Member States - Common objectives within distinct mandates

Europe Day - 9 May: The EU Ombudsman and Ombudsmen from Member States - Common objectives within distinct mandates

Published May 08, 2026

Introduction

For the European Union, 9 May 2026 marks Europe Day.

This should not be just a day of commemoration of the values that make the EU but should be a day of reflection on the present and future of the Union taking into account the uncertain, conflictual and troubled times we are living.  

For the Office of the Parliamentary Ombudsman of Malta, this 9 May 2026 will not be an occasion to treat matters that are surely the responsibility of others, but to consider the meaning of functional European unity founded on shared experience in the public administrative oversight, in particular how unity can be translated into accountable governance through Ombuds institutions. 

Solid

Within the EU, we have an effective EU Ombuds institution, and very active citizen-based national and/or regional Ombuds institutions within Member States, that function within distinct constitutional, legal, and cultural contexts. Nonetheless together they can share experiences and insight. 

Established by virtue of Art 228 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the European Ombudsman investigates complaints concerning maladministration in EU institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies. Its mandate excludes judicial activity but extends broadly across administrative conduct.  

However, the institution has demonstrated how an Ombudsman can exercise influence, strengthen democratic legitimacy, and promote transparency as both a tool of accountability and a driver of reform. By highlighting systemic issues, and engaging proactively with the public, the Office strives to create an environment where maladministration becomes difficult to ignore and transforms individual complaints into catalysts for institutional reflection.

Own-initiative

As has been the case within EU Member States, own-initiative investigations have been valuable aspects of the work of the EU Ombudsman.  By means of these inquiries, structural issues have been addressed which may not have emerged through individual complaints. Complaint-driven investigations, while essential, can be reactive as they depend on persons coming forward, which may not always happen—particularly in cases involving the vulnerable.  

Own-initiative investigations enable an Ombudsman to act as a guardian of the public interest, identifying patterns of maladministration and addressing root causes. They also signal institutional confidence and independence, reinforcing the role of the Ombudsman as much more than a passive recipient of complaints.  

On a national and/or regional level, where admissible at law, own-initiative investigations by Ombuds offices should not be considered adversely by the public administration, because investigations of this nature can identify faults and find remedies in the public interest. 

Constructive

The EU Ombudsman operates within a dense network of institutions, agencies, and stakeholders. Its effectiveness depends on sustained engagement, dialogue, and co-operation. Rather than adopting an adversarial approach, the Office often works with institutions to achieve improvements.  This methodology does not compromise its independence and impartiality. On the contrary, constructive engagement can enhance the likelihood of meaningful reform. By understanding institutional constraints and priorities, the Ombudsman can frame recommendations in a way that is both practical and values-based. The European Ombudsman measures success not only by compliance rates but also by improvements in administrative practices, increased transparency and greater public trust.

National and regional Ombuds Offices (including our own) adopt this approach, depending on the facts and circumstances of every case, as the benefits outweigh the deficiencies. While there are moments when firmness—and even public criticism—is necessary, a consistently adversarial stance may undermine long-term effectiveness. The challenge is to strike the right balance : maintaining independence and authority while fostering a culture of cooperation.

Expertise

The EU Ombudsman deals with highly technical and complex matters, ranging from public procurement to transparency in decision-making processes. To do so productively, the Office has developed significant expertise and specialisation.  This highlights the importance of capacity-building within Ombuds institutions. 

National and/or regional Ombuds offices, even with more limited resources, including our own, are investing considerably in expertise— including significant information technology upgrades, specialised staff training and collaboration with external experts and institutions.  

The Office of the Ombudsman in Malta strongly believes that expertise and constant learning experiences enhance credibility and ensure that recommendations are strong and effective.  In an era of increasingly complex governance, this is indispensable.

Accessibility

Despite operating at a supranational level, the EU Ombudsman has made significant efforts forward to remain accessible to citizens. Clear communication, user-friendly procedures, and outreach initiatives help bridge the gap between institutions and persons.  National and/or regional Ombuds Offices, including our own, are on the same wavelength because often they are the first point of contact for people seeking redress. 

Accessibility is not merely a procedural issue.  It is a matter of legitimacy. An Ombudsman risks undermining his own purpose when – rightly or wrongly – he is perceived by the public to be distant or difficult to engage with.

The EU experience confirms the importance of meeting people where they are—through clear language, digital tools, and proactive engagement.

For national and/or regional Ombuds offices, this outlook gives value to their emphasis on priorities that are strategic in nature. While it is important to address all complaints, identifying recurring themes and focusing resources accordingly can lead to more significant and lasting improvements.  This approach also improves visibility. By bringing to the attention of the public administration specific public interest issues, the Ombudsman has proved that it is a safe and credible voice in promoting good governance.

Networking

The EU Ombudsman plays a central role in networks.  The European Network of Ombudsmen (but not only) facilitates cooperation and exchange of best practices. This networking approach reflects an understanding that administrative justice is not restricted and confined by borders.  

The Office of the Ombudsman in Malta believes that this networking role should extend to Ombuds institutions in nations outside the EU especially those who have proved that they matter in the values of impartiality and independence.

National and/or regional Ombuds offices (like our own) benefit greatly from such co-operation. Sharing experiences, methodologies and knowledge strengthen institutional capacity and foster innovation. 

Ethics

The EU Ombudsman places strong emphasis on ethical standards within public administration. Investigations into conflicts of interest, revolving doors, and transparency in decision-making highlight the importance of integrity as a cornerstone of good governance.

This approach confirms the efforts undertaken by national and/or regional Ombuds offices (including our own) on ethical behaviour apart from the observance of rules.  

The role of the Ombudsman is not limited to the ascertainment of unlawful conduct, but also the promotion and application of standards of fairness, propriety and accountability.  This broader perspective elevates the relevance of the institution vis-à-vis the expectations of the public.

Moral authority 

Moral authority lies at the heart of all ombudsman institutions. Without binding powers, their effectiveness depends on trust and reason. What distinguishes the Maltese experience is the extent to which moral authority is treated not as a by-product but as a deliberate institutional strategy. This approach is patiently built through consistency in decision-making, clarity of reasoning, measured tones and readiness to escalate where necessary.

Conclusion

In a world where public trust in institutions is often fragile, the Ombudsman has a special role to play.  The strength of the institution lies in the trust of the public that the Office has the will and determination to carry out its mandate well.  The EU experience has shown that this confidence grows through its impartiality, integrity, and commitment to justice and the public good.