In this regard, we also noticed information of the Movement of Conscious Citizens of Slovenia on a web portal that “kidnapping children from primary families by means of enforcements of social work centres is a direct violation of Article 9 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child”. The case was discussed as a complaint, and we informed the public that the regulation does not contravene to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, but the section of the Convention was translated incorrectly and does not comply with the English original, thus permitting different interpretations. We again highlighted the problematic exposure of minors’ names and surnames. International child adoption We were also surprised by the case of an adopted girl from Ghana whose parents grew tired of her and left her at Ljubljana Paediatric Clinic. We assessed that adoption should not be treated as a right of parents, but exclusively the right of a child. The above case should be considered as a criminal offence according to Article 192 of the Criminal Code, which governs the neglect and maltreatment of children, and Article 193 of the Criminal Code governing the violation of family obligations. We also stated that if a victim of a criminal offence is a child, anyone, and particularly expert staff in health care, must immediately inform the competent authorities (social work centres, police and prosecution service) of this, irrespective of the provisions on protecting professional secrecy. 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN’S WORK Slovenia: the worst record according to the number of human rights violations per one million citizens In the middle of summer of 2015, we received several inquiries from journalists about Slovenia’s position as the worst violator of human rights with respect to its share (per the number of citizens) of rulings against it in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). We replied that we monitor the work of the relevant Court and respond to its findings, particularly in annual reports that are discussed in the National Assembly. It was assessed that the data were very revealing. However, we also added that it was not possible to simply claim that Slovenia was among the worst violators of fundamental human rights and freedoms without an in-depth analysis and merely on the basis of the share of judgements of conviction. More on this issue can be found in Chapter 2.4 Justice. Request for electric paralysers, treatment of refugees by the police and negotiations with the Government Journalists were disturbed by news of an attempt to introduce electric paralysers; they inquired about the Ombudsman’s opinion on the matter. The Ombudsman has always had reservations about the use of paralysers. We expressed our concern that they could be used more frequently than necessary, and we emphasised that the conditions for use should be similar to those for firearms. We mentioned some tragic cases that have occurred around the world, and provided certain reservations of the CPT on conflicting opinions about their use and also possible negative effects of this coercive measure on health and its possible abuse. More on this issue can be found in Chapter 2.5 Police procedures. The journalists also monitored the arrival or passage of refugees and their treatment by the police. We submitted information to the media on police conduct, which was determined in the Ombudsman’s findings when monitoring. In our press release, we also emphasised that the negotiations between the police and the Government may be an opportunity to obtain comprehensive information on the work and working conditions of police officers in the light of the principle of good administration, and for taking suitable action to make improvements. The respect for dignity and suitable working conditions of police officers also contribute to the better treatment of people and protection of their rights, which is of the utmost importance when the number of refugees is increasing. 194 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 Patria The Ombudsman was asked publicly to respond to the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia in the Patria case. The Ombudsman replied that it was familiar with the events of this case only through publicly available information, since no one from the affected parties had contacted us. We added that we have emphasised several times the importance of qualitative, fair and independent decision making, which is the duty of the judicial branch of power. Effective protection of human rights cannot be guaranteed without a judiciary whose decisions provide formal protection of human rights. Therefore, it is important that judicial proceedings be legitimate, without undue delay and that they observe all guarantees of a fair and unbiased procedure as determined by the Constitution, international treaties and acts, because only such proceedings can yield a fair decision. The Ombudsman also expressed the need to issue high-quality court decisions (and guaranteed trials without undue delay) which is stressed in its annual reports, and added that it encouraged further enhancing the efficiency of judicial and supervisory bodies, including their improved transparency and public functioning. On compulsory vaccination The public was concerned about the notification of Andrej Baričič, candidate for director of Ljubljana University Medical Centre, on compulsory vaccination of the medical staff at the Centre against influenza. The Ombudsman spoke about this subject at a press conference on 29 October 2015. More on this can be found below. We also received an inquiry from a journalist about whether parents are entitled to a wage compensation for the time their child is being treated in a hospital. We assessed that this right could apply only in exceptional cases, which would have to be determined in advance by law, whereby experts should provide more detailed explanations. In fact, parents are entitled to wage compensation for sick leave due to child care and nursing; however, health care is provided by a hospital when a child is in the hospital. The same applies for rehabilitation in a health resort. Dog on the Ombudsman’s premises We also received a question if we had a dog at the Ombudsman’s head office. A complainant saw it and informed a journalist about it. We replied that none of the staff had a dog permanently in their office. However, a person with special needs was doing 14 days of practical training at the Ombudsman and a colleague brought his therapy dog to work, which he frequently takes on visits to people in hospice care for the purposes of therapy, which he does as a volunteer. Sexual extortion of women relating to the workplace Certain journalists who were insufficiently informed about the Ombudsman’s work asked us about appointments to certain bodies. We explained that it was not the Ombudsman’s task to assess the suitability of candidates for certain positions or workplaces, and expressed our hope that this could be resolved accordingly by the competent services and bodies which, in compliance with the law, participate in selection procedures. Towards the end of the year, a journalist asked us about our position on the sexual extortion of women relating to workplace and how we respond to such cases; the inquiry was based on an assumed relationship of Ljubljana mayor with a pharmacist. We explained that the Ombudsman had never received any complaints referring to sexual extortion of women. The information on such cases could be provided by law enforcement authorities (police and prosecution service). Due to the lack of such complaints, the Ombudsman was unable to give information on whether the victims contact suitable institutions. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA FOR 2015 195 3 INFORMATION ABOUT THE OMBUDSMAN’S WORK be helpful to address the issue of why or because of whom the assistance of the state is needed to enforce a certain final court decision, and what the state could do so that its intervention is not be required.