The court is once again discussing the complaint of the ombudsman regarding the Šantovka Tower in Olomouc

Olomouc - The Regional Court in Olomouc today reopened the lawsuit by the Public Defender of Rights Stanislav Křeček against the zoning decision for the construction of the Šantovka Tower high-rise building in Olomouc. The Supreme Administrative Court (NSS) recently annulled the verdict by which the regional court rejected the ombudsman's lawsuit in March 2022. At that time, the judges concluded that the Public Defender of Rights had not demonstrated significant public interest in submitting the complaint.

Following the NSS decision, the Regional Court in Olomouc must once again address the lawsuit. The chairwoman of the panel, Barbora Berková, today postponed the proceedings to Wednesday, when she plans to deliver a verdict.

Behind the 74-meter-high Šantovka Tower project, which is to be built in Olomouc adjacent to the city’s protected historical reserve, is entrepreneur Richard Morávek. Due to the ombudsman's lawsuit and the subsequent suspensive effect, he could not apply for a building permit. The Šantovka Tower has been the subject of discussion in Olomouc for years. Heritage preservationists and some experts disagree with it, claiming it would damage the historical panorama of the city. Morávek asserts that the panorama of Olomouc is not endangered.

The Regional Court in Olomouc justified its decision two years ago by stating that the ombudsman’s office failed to substantiate its submitted lawsuit against the zoning decision for the Šantovka Tower with significant public interest. However, the NSS panel, to which the ombudsman filed a cassation complaint, concluded that the requirement for significant public interest was fulfilled in this case by Křeček's assertion regarding systemic risk of bias among the decision-making officials. According to the NSS, this undoubtedly threatens the public interest regarding impartial decision-making by the administrative authority, which can be considered sufficiently serious to justify the ombudsman's lawsuit.

According to the NSS verdict, the regional court should have presented evidence that the Public Defender of Rights proposed to support his claims. It is now up to the regional court to assess whether there truly existed a systemic risk of bias in the matter.