ÚOHS erred when it refused to assess the competition on the proposal of the NK

Brno - The Office for the Protection of Competition (ÚOHS) is said to have made a mistake, according to the ombudsman Otakar Motejl, when it refused to assess the architectural competition for the design of a new building for the National Library in Prague. The ombudsman concluded that ÚOHS should have decided on the course of the competition. The office did not do so, yet it commented on the matter. ÚOHS had the case on the table three times. This is indicated in the report of the public defender, which is available to ČTK.
    Discussion about the library's appearance began after the project by architect Jan Kaplický was selected for it. However, the library has not begun construction. Prague did not provide land for it.
    Although the antitrust office previously refused to discuss the library's handling of the competition, it still intervened significantly in the case. The head of the office, Martin Pecina, recommended in a letter to the Ministry of Culture and the library's representatives to cancel the competition, as he deemed it contrary to the law.
    "The ombudsman considers it unacceptable for an administrative authority to replace decision-making activities with informal letters that do not contain a reasoned conclusion regarding a possible violation of legal procedure and against which one cannot properly defend," said Iva Hrazdílková, spokesperson for the Office of the Public Defender of Rights, to ČTK.
    The alleged refusal to properly oversee compliance with the Public Procurement Act by ÚOHS led, according to Motejl, to uncertainty "on the part of both the contracting authority, namely the National Library, and the participants of the competition, including its winner."
    In the report on the case, Motejl notes that in some instances, the media outputs from the antitrust office did not reflect reality. The defender took note of the "inappropriateness" of comments made by the office's leadership regarding the legitimacy of the competition, which were made at a time when ÚOHS denied its jurisdiction and refused to make a decision on the matter.