Právní a zdravotně sociální aspekty činnosti OSPOD jako ustanovených opatrovníků v zámu nezletilých dětí

The Czech Republic as a signatory of the Convention on the Rights of the Child has vested the practice of state administration in the field of care for minor children to municipalities with extended powers, where the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of minor children is safeguarded by state authorities of social and legal protection of children (ASLPC hereinafter). These authorities are incorporated to the extent laid down by the Act on Social and Legal Protection of Children (Act No 359/1999 Coll., as amended). The position and roles of ASLPC and their competence and jurisdiction are also regulated by the same act. The position of workers of these authorities and its legal embodiment is equally important. Regarding professionality, there are high demands on these workers. In the Czech Republic, significant changes in legislature have been made over the past three years. These amendments have led to the strengthening of the rights of minor children and to the establishing of new tools for their protection. In connection with the adoption of new substantive regulation of family law, which is now exhaustively dealt with by the Act No 89/2012 Coll., the Civil Code, new procedural rules have been established regarding protection of rights of minor children. Such procedural legislation includes (apart from the long-existent Act No. 99/1963, the Code of Civil Procedure) the Act No 292/2013 Coll., on Special Civil Proceedings. The decision-making regarding minor children has been vested mainly by the state into the competence of courts. The courts appoint the locally relevant ASLPC as a guardian who then represents the interests of minor children. The purpose, interwoven with and derived from the first one, was to explore the opinions of selected social workers of ASLPC and of district court judges regarding the defined problems occurring during the work of ASLPCs and courts while protecting the interests of minor children. These particularly include: the use of the tool of precautionary measure; problems of different territorial jurisdiction of courts and ASLPCs; processing of complaints regarding bias in various phases of the proceedings; professional training of workers of ASLPC It is evident from the proposals of both judges and ASLPC workers that it is necessary to unify territorial jurisdiction. The courts are suggesting the priority criterion of the address where the child mainly resides. ASLPC workers suggest the official permanent residence as the prime criterion. Bias causes problems in all phases of proceedings. It is obvious that courts take differing approaches towards the solution of this problem (some courts solve the problem of bias complaints filed by the parties while other courts do not) and for ASLPC workers it is difficult to assess how to act when such complaint is raised against them. The training of ASLPC workers - workers are obliged to educate themselves and their employer is obliged to finance such training. Not all ASLPCs are able to provide training in the required extent - due to financial reasons (the average costs of education of one employee pose from 9,169 to 13,400 CZK annually and they cover approximately 6 days of training). The heavy work-load caused by insufficient numbers of ASLPC employees prevents them from completing such compulsory training. As part of the examination of the "participation of a collision guardian in court proceedings" it has been found out that irregular participation of the worker in the proceedings (absence from participation in appeals proceedings); incomplete reports (directed to courts) from surveys in families. Based on comprehensive examination of the problems of territorial jurisdiction, it was recommended that requests are independently recorded and financial compensation is provided for ASLPCs who are requested to represent minors in front of courts, to draft proposals for precautionary measures