CANCELLOR OF JUSTICE AS OMBUDSMAN FOR CHILDREN First, Pärnu city government endangered the welfare of the child by its delay to have recourse to the court in a situation where the city government was obviously aware of the need for restricting the right of custody of the child’s father and appointing a guardian for the child. Second, the city government breached the principle of good administration by providing contradictory and partly incorrect explanations concerning the issues of the right of custody, representation and visiting rights in respect of the child to the mother’s guardian and the substitute family. Third, the city government violated the visiting rights of the child and the mother by organising meetings only at the request of the mother and failing to implement measures to promote their contacts. On this basis, the Chancellor recommended to Pärnu city government that in the future in situations where welfare of a child is in danger, and in order to eliminate the danger it is necessary to restrict a parent’s right of custody, it should have immediate recourse to the court to implement the necessary measures. The Chancellor also recommended to Pärnu city government to proceed from valid legislation when giving explanations concerning the right of custody, representation and visiting rights in respect of children, and not place the duty of legal representation of a child on a service provider or other third person who is not the child’s legal representative. In addition, the Chancellor recommended to the city government in the future to promote contacts between a mother and a child on its own initiative. For this, the Chancellor recommended the city government to ascertain which organisational measures help to promote contacts between the particular child and the mother and then implement those measures. PART II On the basis of a petition, the Chancellor verified lawfulness of the activities of Pärnu city government in organising the life of a child separated from family and in restricting the rights of the parents. As a result of the proceedings, the Chancellor found several violations in the activities of the city government. PART III Case No 7-5/111603 PART IV PART I 10. Activities of Pärnu city government in organising the life of a child separated from family In its reply to the Chancellor, Pärnu city government promised to start organising regular meetings between the child and the mother with participation of the officials fulfilling the duties of the guardians of the child and the mother who can provide guidance to the mother on how to communicate with the child. 11. The activities of Paldiski town government in its function as the guardian in ensuring the rights of the child Case No 7-5/130761 On the basis of a petition from an individual, the Chancellor verified whether Paldiski town government had complied with the principle of guaranteeing fundamental rights and freedoms and ensured the welfare of the petitioner’s grandchild. As a result of the proceedings, the Chancellor concluded that Paldiski town government, in fulfilling its social welfare functions and looking after the custody of the child in its function as the guardian, had not violated the principle of guaranteeing the fundamental rights and freedoms with respect to the petitioner. 51