Our recommendation – that the Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning (MOP) draft amendments to the Housing Act which places an obligation on municipalities to provide a certain number of residential units (as per the number of residents) of a suitable standard; publish a call for the allocation of non-profit apartments for lease at certain intervals; make a thorough analysis of the management of multi-dwelling buildings, and supervise the work of managers of multi-dwelling buildings more closely – remained unrealised and dependant on the anticipated amendment to the Housing Act (SZ-1) following the passage of the National Housing Programme, which points to progress; however, it is too slow and for many people even too late. Our recommendation on additional personnel for the Housing Inspection Service has not been acted on and is linked to the excuse about the staffing plan of the Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia for the Environment and Spatial Planning under the auspices of which the Housing Inspection Service operates. We believe that a reassignment of public employees from other state authorities could be a possible solution. Our recommendation to clearly define the competences of the Housing Inspection Service was also not observed. Regarding the urgent elimination of violations, which in our opinion arise from the unequal position of all former holders of occupancy rights (those in denationalised and others in socially-owned flats), the Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning stated its opinion only with regard to tenants in denationalised flats, i.e. that social and other protection provided to these persons by the applicable legislation is suitable. For reasons given in its 2014 annual report (p. 250), the Ombudsman does not agree with this argument. 2.9 HOUSING MATTERS The recommendation on the equalisation of rights of former caretakers – those who used apartments as holders of occupancy rights and those with temporary rights – was also not acted on. Evictions and insufficient housing stock of the state and municipalities In 2015, we also considered numerous cases relating to which the complainants wrote to us immediately before an announced eviction. They admitted the non-payment of liabilities relating to apartments or other debts, but they also stated that this was due to their loss of jobs or other unpredictable and uncontrollable problems. They asked us to help postpone evictions, find new apartments or allocate aid for the payment of debts. 2.9.3 Homelessness Evictions and the inability of the state to provide at least a roof over the head of people who find themselves in distress, if not a proper home, are the reasons for people’s homelessness. We particularly dealt with this issue in 2015 and met NGOs operating in this field. In cooperation with the Slovenian Network of Organisations Working with the Homeless and the Socio Association, we held a press conference on the occasion of World Homeless Day. The Deputy Ombudsman spoke about the Ombudsman’s findings and recommendations at the event, ‘Homelessness Here and Now’, which was organised in Koper by the Slovenian Red Cross, Regional Red Cross Association Koper and SVIT Koper, the Association for helping addicts and their families. During the Ombudsman’s visits to individual municipalities, we always discuss this topic with mayors. The Ombudsman was an honorary sponsor of the Homelessness Congress in Piran, where she also spoke and emphasised the Ombudsman’s efforts in this field. Joint findings and proposals include: - A special act on homelessness should be considered which would also regulate housing issues. At present, the field is only very partially regulated according to individual sectors which lack mutual coherence. - Since several rights may be violated simultaneously in regard to homeless people – not only the right to adequate housing and home, but also the right to health insurance and social security – it is necessary to address homelessness immediately and with all due responsibility. Regarding the above, our general finding from previous years must be repeated: there is a lack of sufficient housing and residential units; insufficient funds are provided for residential construction; the existing housing legislation lacks flexibility, since it fails to promote mutual assistance between municipalities when resolving housing issues, and finally, many problems could be eliminated with a suitably managed policy on leasing private apartments. 2.9.4 Subsidising rents Regarding subsidised rents, we point out the issue of the existing Housing Act, which determines that only people who applied to the latest call of a municipality to obtain non-profit flats were eligible for subsidised market rent. The problem is that municipalities publish these calls at very different and ‘rare’ intervals due to the shortage of flats, so individuals who cannot apply to these calls are also unable to obtain subsidies even if, according to the income census, they are entitled to them. We propose that the competent ministry resolve this situation when drafting the new Housing Act. In July 2015, the Human Rights Ombudsman of the Republic of Slovenia filed a request for a constitutional review of Article 25 of the Act Regulating Measures Aimed at the Fiscal Balance of Municipalities in connection with Article 8 of the Exercise of Rights from Public Funds Act with the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia with a proposal to suspend execution of the challenged legal provision and a proposal for absolute priority discussion. The Constitutional Court has not decided yet on this matter. We provide an example below in which a municipality did not want to disburse a rent subsidy and execute a decision in spite of the enforceability of the decision of a competent social work centre. How can an individual trust in the rule of law if the authorities provide such a poor example? Example: Enforcement against a municipality which refuses to disburse rent subsidies A complainant contacted the Ombudsman and informed us of the decision of a social work centre (CSD) which stated that the complainant was entitled to a subsidised market rent for the apartment in which he resided with his large family. The subsidy was supposed to have been be paid by the municipality in which the complainant and his family live. The complainant claimed that the municipality did not meet the obligations stated in the relevant CSD’s decision, due to which his large family was at risk of eviction. When discussing the complaint, it was established that the municipality was not meeting the obligations stated in the CSD’s decision although the decision was enforceable. The municipality did not agree with the decision, which it stated in its preliminary opinion, and it also contested the amount of the subsidy and the eligibility for rent subsidy. Regarding the CSD’s activities, they explained that they could not take any legal action against the municipality, which refuses to disburse the rent subsidy. We informed the CSD that we did not agree with the aforementioned, because it was understood from the clarifications received from the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities in another case that the CSD was obliged to file an enforcement proposal to the Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia (FURS) at the request of a client or enter such a request in an e-enforcement application. The CSD was informed thereof. - The number of homeless persons is growing; the structure of homelessness has changed. If homeless people in the past were mainly unemployed men aged about 50, today they include entire families. - It is necessary to adopt a strategy to combat homelessness, which NGOs should be included in preparing, since proposals and solutions must come from practice, not merely theory. In its additional reply, the CSD explained that they had received instructions from the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities after our intervention that the authority issuing the decision 114 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 115 2.9 HOUSING MATTERS 2.9.2 Realisation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations