only take into account the procedures opened in 2016, it is observed that two thirds were closed during this year. Graph VIII Grounds for a closing case N = 7119 3500 3230 3000 2334 2000 1000 361 0 Dismissal case Solved by restauration of legality during the investigation of the case Solved with a recommendation Request for constitutional review 506 17 4 169 84 Forward the complainant to another entity Remark or suggestion to the addressed entity Lack of competence of the Ombudsman 302 112 Impossibility to adopt any other procedure Withdrawal of the complainant Complaint without further redress of illegality or injustice In a scenario of increasing number of filings, regarding its foundations, the main observation focuses on the significant growth of cases where the reparation of illegality or injustice has been achieved, in line with the trend already verified. In fact, 45,4% of the procedures closed in 2016 were terminated (42,6% in 2015 and 39,2% in 2014). It should also be noted that, in relative terms, there was a small increase in cases of referral to an adequate mean of guaranteeing the rights and interests involved. It should also be noted that this percentage increase in the adequately resolved cases was verified with the similar decrease in the number of procedures filed (32,8% in 2016, compared to 37,8% in 2015, and 38,6% in 2014). It should be noted that the cases in which, when the complaint was filled out, the solution considered as minimally restorative was not achieved. In other words: cases where, despite all or at least a significant part of the Ombudsman’s satisfaction, the complainant’s claim has been identified, no solution has been found to remedy illegality or injustice. This was the situation in 112 cases, corresponding to 1,6% of the total number of procedures filed. 24 |