116 ANNUAL REPORT 2017 authorised, the requirement of legality under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights on the right to respect for private and family life, the home and correspondence could not be considered to be met. Although the Ombudsman was understanding of the views put forward by the authorities on the purpose and basis for the regime of checking the residents’ mail, he recommended that the institution discontinue the regime. The case also involved an issue of the institution’s use of a ‘seclusion room’. However, as the institution informed the Ombudsman that it no longer had such a room – which had been used for its purpose on one occasion only – the Ombudsman found no cause to comment in detail on this issue. 2017-31. Municipality’s responsibility that meeting with employee was conducted in a manner showing full respect of her freedom of expression A municipally employed nurse wrote a critical post on Facebook about a colleague giving notice as a result of restructurings in their workplace. Three days later, the nurse was summoned to a meeting with the management and her shop steward at 13 minutes’ notice. The management started the meeting by emphasising that it was not a disciplinary hearing: the purpose of the meeting was to give the nurse factual information, including about the restructurings on which she had commented in her post. At the meeting, the management pointed out, among other things, that the nurse had made some of her colleagues feel sad and said that it was ‘a pity’ that she had not first contacted the management or a representative in the contributory influence and co-determination system, for instance her trade union representative or her work environment representative. The Ombudsman had no grounds for criticising that the municipality contacted the nurse to give her factual information about, among other things, the restructurings which had been carried out before she was employed and on which she had commented in her post. In a situation such as the present, however, the municipality had a special responsibility to ensure that its contact with the employee was conducted in a manner which did not involve a risk that she would refrain from expressing her views in the public debate in future. The Ombudsman thus stated that it