The Ombudsman's complaint regarding Šantovka Tower in Olomouc is heading to the Supreme Administrative Court

Brno - The Public Defender of Rights Stanislav Křeček has filed a cassation complaint against the March decision of the Regional Court in Olomouc, which rejected the Ombudsman's office lawsuit against the zoning decision for the construction of the controversial Šantovka Tower high-rise building. The building is set to be constructed in the vicinity of the urban heritage reserve in Olomouc. The Ombudsman's lawsuit is now headed to the Supreme Administrative Court (NSS). In a press release today, spokesperson for the Ombudsman's office Markéta Bočková informed about this. Due to this lawsuit and the subsequent suspensive effect, the investor has not yet been able to apply for a building permit. The 74-meter tall Šantovka Tower has been a topic of discussion in Olomouc for years. Preservationists and some experts oppose it, arguing that it would damage the historical panorama of the city. The project is backed by entrepreneur Richard Morávek, who claims that the panorama of central Olomouc is not threatened.

The Public Defender of Rights also requested the granting of a suspensive effect. If the builder were to obtain a building permit during the court proceedings, the controversial building could be constructed regardless of the potential success of the cassation complaint. In such a case, winning in court would, according to the ombudsman, be practically worthless, as the second largest urban heritage reserve in the Czech Republic would suffer harm that could no longer be remedied.

In a public interest lawsuit, the ombudsman sought the annulment of the zoning decision for the placement of the Šantovka Tower construction issued by the Olomouc City Hall. According to him, the placement of the high-rise building next to the urban heritage reserve simultaneously violates several public interests. Besides the interest in protecting the Urban Heritage Reserve of Olomouc and preserving the values of the area of the city of Olomouc that are protected by the Olomouc zoning plan, it also pertains to the public interest in environmental protection, and last but not least, the public interest in impartial decision-making by the state administration authority.

However, the Regional Court did not substantively address the lawsuit and rejected it as inadmissible. According to the court, the ombudsman, as the plaintiff, did not prove the so-called serious public interest, and was therefore not entitled to file the lawsuit at all. The Public Defender of Rights is now contesting this decision of the regional court with a cassation complaint to the NSS. "I do not agree with the assessment of the regional court. I am convinced that we have proven a serious public interest in filing the lawsuit. Therefore, I have now filed a cassation complaint so that a higher judicial authority can express its views on the ombudsman's ability to file this lawsuit," said the ombudsman.