The Ombudsman helps people, businesses and organisations facing problems with the EU administration by investigating complaints, as well as by proactively looking into broader systemic issues.

At the request of Parliament, the Ombudsman may be removed by the Court of Justice if "(s)he no longer fulfils the conditions required for the performance of his duties or if (s)he is guilty of serious misconduct".

On another occasion, following a complaint from a Hungarian, EPSO agreed to clarify information in recruitment competition notices concerning eligibility and pre-selection tests.

A third case was resolved when the Ombudsman compelled the council to release to the public documents it had previously not acknowledged the existence of.

In case a citizen is prevented from accessing such requested documents, he or she can turn with a complaint to the European Ombudsman to try to achieve a resolution.

For instance, in case 693/2011/RA, following European Medicines Agency (EMA)'s refusal to grant public access to clinical studies carried out on a multiple sclerosis drug, the Ombudsman made a friendly solution proposal on it with some detailed suggestions for the particular case, trying to achieve the transparency the complainant was requesting.

European Ombudsman works to ensure that the EU's democratic decision-making process is characterized by the highest transparency standards.

Lobbying transparency is one of the main topics of action of the European Ombudsman, through various strategic initiatives, trying to mitigate potential conflicts of interest.

The Council ended up agreeing to the European Ombudsman consideration and drew guidance for Member States indicating that they would no longer accept sponsorship in the context of their presidencies.

A key part of European Ombudsman work is to ensure that EU institutions respect fundamental rights.

The European Ombudsman complements the work of the courts, as it offers an alternative way for citizens to resolve disputes with the EU administration, without incurring in costs such as lawyers or fees.

[17] If no resolution is found neither from the proposed friendly solution, nor from the recommendation, then the European Ombudsman can publish suggestions for improvements, directed to the institution, to address the issue.

If, at the end of an investigation, an institution rejects its final findings or recommendations, the Ombudsman can criticize it publicly, raising importance on the issue, and can make a special report to the European Parliament.

This counts to justify the significant difference in percentage of opened inquiries compared to the number of complaints submitted.

[21] It is active towards serving the wider public interest and one of its goals is to achieve "tangible improvements for complainants and the public vis-a-vis the EU administration"[22] On one hand, European Ombudsman is responsive towards complaints from individuals, companies and associations, replying to and resolving complaints related to administration problems in the EU institutions.

Accessing the European Ombudsman's effectiveness implies having into consideration quantitative data, such as the statistics of the responsiveness to complaints and statistics on own-initiative inquiries, but also qualitative data in order to try to better understand all kinds of achievements when contacting the institutions (that is, how EU institutions react to the European Ombudsman's proposals).

The European Ombudsman concluded that the EBA should have forbidden such move of job, given the high risks of conflict of interests.

- Case 860/2018/THH: positive cooperation following European Food Safety Authority's refusal to grant public access to declarations of interest of middle management staff.

The EFSA ended up following the Ombudsman's request to make those declarations public and has a more transparent policy in this area.

- Case 357/2019/FP: positive cooperation following the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)'s refusal to grant public access to documents relating to contacts with stakeholders.

The European Ombudsman opened an inquiry following a complaint and verified that some internal notes of meetings should have been disclosed.

- Joint cases 488/2018/KR and 514/2018/KR: positive cooperation in the context of an inquiry regarding the appointment of the commission's Secretary-General (its highest civil servant).