The Czech Public Defender of Rights was established by Act No. 349/1999 Coll. on the
Public Defender of Rights (further only "the Act").
Approval of the Act meant that the Czech legal order was to incorporate a brand new and
unusual institution.
At the stage of the preparation of the draft the opportunity to apply extensive experience
based on similar overseas and foreign institutions of the ombudsman was limited since the
Czech counterpart of such an institution was established in a relatively different legal as well
as social environment.  The Act complies with all of the basic principles of the ombudsman
even if it might have had to accept a slightly different direction with respect to certain issues.
The Act was being drafted at the time of heated discussions in which doubts were repeatedly
articulated undermining the very need for such an Act.
 One of the crucial arguments to support the passage of the Act was, among others, the
statement of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The Committee of
Ministers of the Council of Europe in its Recommendation R/85/13 on Institution of the
Ombudsman as well as in its Recommendation R/97/14 on establishment of independent
national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights urged the member states
to consider the establishment of the ombudsman institution or an institution of similar nature
especially in the countries affected by sudden social and political changes, by economic
transformation or by violent events of war-like nature leading to threats to human, industrial,
social and cultural rights.
Foreign experience also proves that ombudsman institutions remedy or at least act as means
for reduction of the dissatisfaction of citizens with respect to the situation within state
administration. Such dissatisfaction might however, be based on both objective and subjective
negative experience with the way state administration officials execute the authority of state.
Citizens are sensitive to situations in which, actually or supposedly, they might feel neglected,
overlooked or humbled, since citizens often do not know where, how and in what way their
rights and interests can be exerted.
The system of courts including administrative courts seems to be complicated, complex and
costly as well as time-consuming and often inefficient and subject to a much discussion. Apart
from those traditional procedural means of protection what seems to generally appear as
insufficient is the mechanism of internal supervision over the execution of state
administration applying function-based structure and practicing the principle of purely
function-based responsibility for the malpractice or insufficiencies uncovered. Unlike court-
type institutions serving to rectify cases in which failure to comply with legal standards is
uncovered the Public Defender of Rights can ensure remedy even in cases when the action of
a relevant office or an institution complies with the law but might be in other ways incorrect,
inadequate or unjust or even in cases when the relevant institution fails to act.
The existence of and institution of the ombudsman can to a large extent remedy the
disadvantageous status of citizens with respect to the system of state administration might be
significantly compensated for, since the ombudsman acts as an institution that is external,
independent, free, relatively co-operative and as informal as possible.
The main role of the ombudsman is to ensure protection of rights and legitimate interests
mainly in the areas in which the citizens or other entities and subjects encounter the offices of
state administration.
Foreign experience indicates that the very existence of the ombudsman also has extensive
preventive impact. The offices and the officials in charge of state administration must be
aware that when citizens as a party to the procedure do not feel satisfied with either their
performance or with their decision, they may find themselves in a situation in which they will
have to provide explanation and justification for the measures taken and the decisions issued.
The Public Defender of Rights has no direct means or mechanisms of enforcement at his/her
disposal:
ˇ The ombudsman requests the body of state administration responsible for malpractice
or error to remedy the situation.
ˇ The role of the Defender cannot be perceived in changing or replacing the decisions of
the relevant body of state administration but in instructing the above bodies to apply
their own supervisory and correctional sanction-imposing legitimate authority and
power to ensure remedy of the situation.
ˇ The most significant and unexpectedly the most effective means of sanction that the
Defender of Rights is entitled to use is the sanction represented by informing the
public on the malpractice of relevant institution.
The Defender of Rights is obliged to continually inform the public on the activities and
findings of the Office  The Public Defender of Rights regularly on a quarterly basis informs
the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic on the activities of the Office.
The Act stipulates that the Public Defender of Rights is not only obliged to contribute towards
remedies for malpractice and errors of the individual institutions in their dealings with citizens
but is also obliged to evaluate the findings and propose such systemic remedial measures that
would remove or alter the actual cause of the situation leading to malpractice in the first
instance.  Such activities represent the contribution of the Public Defender of Rights
towards the improvement of the quality of the state administration or in other words towards
the improvement of the state administration with respect to all persons involved.
Findings based on the activities of the Defender in a given year in their more general form are
submitted to the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic in the annual report for the
relevant year. The report is to be discussed by the Chamber of Deputies and is also received
by the Senate, the President of the Czech Republic, the Government Departments and other
administrative bodies with national powers.

The report contains detailed information on the activities of the Defender. It also attempts to
attract attention to issues uncovered by the Public Defender of Rights that could be seen as the
cause of the dissatisfaction of the complainants with respect to the legislation of the country
and malpractice of state administration. On a more general level such issues could be
perceived as the cause of the obstacle standing in the way of citizens attempting to fulfill their
rights and legitimate interests or even causing failure of citizens to have such rights
recognized. The law-making authorities in question, if willing to listen carefully can be more
aware of the inefficiencies that are to be resolved.
The Public Defender of Rights
The Public Defender of Rights is elected by the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Republic.
Two candidates are proposed by the President and two by the Senate. The term of office of the
Public Defender is six years and the Defender can serve only two consequent terms of office.
He/she can be any person eligible for the Senate:
ˇ Czech citizenship
ˇ The right to vote
ˇ Aged 40 or more
Such a person may not be a member of any political party or movement and may not
undertake any other posts, offices or any other gainful activities. The Defender assumes
his/her powers within the office when being sworn in by the Chairman of the Chamber of
Deputies of the Czech Republic and once established in the office he/she reports directly to
the Chamber of Deputies.
The Deputy Public Defender of Rights is elected in a procedure identical to the election of the
Defender, identical conditions for candidature and identical term of office apply. The Deputy
has at his/her disposal the full powers of the Defender when the Defender is not available and
additional powers entrusted to the deputy by the Defender.
The Office assisting the Public Defender of Rights in his/her activities is established out of the
will of the Defender since the Act contains merely a basic framework for activities of the
Office of the Public Defender of Rights. This Office "shall fulfill the tasks related to
professional, organizational and technical support" of the activities of the Public Defender of
Rights.
The Powers of the Public Defender of Rights
As stipulated by the Act the Public Defender of Rights in the Czech Republic acts to protect
the persons from conduct of offices and other institutions undertaking state administration,
should such conduct be contrary to the law or even if not contravening the law then otherwise
faulty, erroneous or incorrect.
Acts to protect persons from conduct of offices and other institutions undertaking state
administration should such conduct:
ˇ be contrary to the Law or
ˇ not comply with principles of a democratic state respecting the rule of law or be defined
as a failure to act.
That means such conduct as does not comply with the principles of a democratic state
respecting the rule of law and the principles of good administration or such conduct as can be
defined as a failure of the relevant office or institution to act.
In accordance with the Act the Defender is authorized to deal with complaints submitted
about the conduct of the following:
ˇ Ministries and other administrative offices with authority over the entire territory of the
state and administrative offices subordinate to these,
ˇ The Czech National Bank when acting as an office of state administration,
ˇ The Council for Radio and Television Broadcasting,
ˇ Self-government bodies (local and regional authorities) if the conduct is related to state
administration (not conduct related to self-government activities)
ˇ Municipalities when their conduct is related to the activities of state administration but not
when the decisions issued by the municipalities within their own authority are concerned,
ˇ Police of the Czech Republic with the exception of investigations within criminal
proceedings,
ˇ Army of the Czech Republic and the Castle Guards,
ˇ Prison Service of the Czech Republic,
ˇ Institutions, facilitating custody and prison sentence service, protective and institutional or
deterrence care, and institutions providing protective health care,
ˇ public health insurance institutions,
ˇ Bodies of courts when conducting state administration (mainly issues of procedural
delays, inactivity of the court and inappropriate conduct of judges).
In accordance with the Act the Defender is awarded extensive authority to conduct
independent inquiries into individual issues; however, the Defender is not entitled to
substitute for the activities of bodies of state administration nor is entitled to alter or replace
their decisions.
Should he uncover maladministration he may request that the relevant office or institution
remedy the situation. A significant right of the Public Defender of Rights is his right to decide
to open an inquiry on his own initiative.
ˇ The above legal definition of the authority of the Defender does not entitle the
Defender to interfere with civil law or private law relations nor disputes (including the
disputes between employer and employee even where the employer is an office of
state administration.)
ˇ The Defender may not interfere with the decision-making power of courts, does not
constitute an instance of appeal against decisions issued by courts and is entitled to
interfere with the conduct and activities of specifically stipulated institutions.
The Defender's authority does not include the following institutions:
ˇ Courts of all instances and the nature of their decision-making power,
ˇ Parliament, President and the government,
ˇ Supreme Audit Office,
ˇ Intelligence services of the Czech Republic,
ˇ Bodies active in criminal proceedings,
ˇ The State Prosecutor.
How to Approach the Public Defender of Rights
How to submit a complaint?
Although submission of a complaint is not bound by many formal requirements, the Act
stipulates the complaint is to contain several elements. Supplying these when first contacting
the office avoids unnecessary correspondence needed to supplement a complaint and will lead
to significant reduction of time needed to deal with the matter. Complaints can be submitted
(or supplemented) in writing or even orally at the Office of the Public Defender of Rights, or
via electronic mail containing the form with all of the required elements.
The complaint must be submitted by the person requesting protection of their rights.
Complaints on behalf of other legally competent persons may not be submitted.  Only
complaint filed by a representative of another person, written power of attorney or another
document stating the scope of representation authority.
A complaint should always include:
ˇ explanation of relevant circumstances stating whether the matter has or has not been
passed onto another body and if so with what result,
ˇ name, surname and address of the complainant (if relevant acceptable power of attorney),
in case of corporate entities the name, address and person authorised to act on behalf of
the entity,
ˇ Descriptive title of the office or offices the complaint is concerned with, documentation
indicating that the institution concerned has been unsuccessfully requested to remedy the
situation.
ˇ Should the complaint be concerned with a decision, the complainant is requested to
enclose a copy of the decision.