OMBUDSMAN

Ombudsman in the UK. The Cabinet office published its consultation on a Public Service Ombudsman in 2015 based on the Gordon Report 2015 and there was a government response to the consultation in December 2015 which led to the publishing of a draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill in December 2016. The Draft Bill will bring about some significant changes in the sense that it will put together the offices of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and the Local Commissioner for Administration with the objective of providing a single “no wrong door” office for dealing with complaints of maladministration and failures of It became recognized in the 1960’s that there was inadequate provision for the investigation and resolution of citizen’s complaints against the government departments. Adopting the ombudsman concept from the Scandinavian Countries, parliament enacted the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967. An ombudsman is an independent investigator with appropriate powers of complementing the role of the court by investigating complaints of maladministration from a relevant source or individual.

The principle was introduced in the United Kingdom through the passage of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967. In 1961, the committee of Justice, the British section of the International Commission of Justice, headed by Sir John Wyatt took the necessary from which resulted in the PCA 1967, thus creating the office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.

Moving onto maladministration, one of the standing point of ombudsman, the PCA 1967 does not provide any specific definition of the term in order to imply a broad concept. Richard Crossman described maladministration as including bias, neglect, and inattention etc. Lord Donaldson in ex p. Eastleigh explained that maladministration is primarily concerned with the manner in which authorities reach a decision not the quality of the decision itself. In ex p. Eastleigh explained that maladministration is primarily concerned with the manner in which authorities reach a decision not the quality of the decision itself. In ex p.

The Parliament ary Commissioner for Administration is appointed by the Crown on advice of the government and statutorily dealt by S.1 of PCA 1967. Under S.3 of the Act the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration may appoint such officers he may determine with approval of the treasury as to numbers and conditions of service. S.5(1) of PCA 1967 provides that a member of the public may make a complaint and the Commissioner may investigate according to the rules on jurisdiction and the person claiming must have sustained injustice due to the maladministration. The Commissioner if give the ability to investigate a wider range of complaints than the ones which could be investigated by the courts. However, the Commissioner’s jurisdiction does not extend to the activities of the bodies which are not under direct ministerial control i.e. foreign affairs, diplomatic activity, the investigation of crime etc. (S.5(3) of PCA 1967, Sch 3). Moving onto to maladministration, one of the standing point of ombudsman, the PCA 1967 does not provide any specific definition of the term in order to imply a broad concept. Richard Crossman described maladministration as including bias, neglect, and inattention etc. Lord Donaldson in ex p. Eastleigh explained that maladministration is primarily concerned with the manner in which authorities reach a decision not the quality of the decision itself. In ex p.

Bradford maladministration was described as faulty and bad administration. The term maladministration was subject to criticism and therefore suggestions were made for its publication “Our Fettered Ombudsman”, to dispense with the term and instead allow the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration to investigate any action which is unreasonable, unjust, or oppressive.

According to S.6 of PCA 1967, complaints can be made by any person or body corporate and it must be made within 12 months, from the date the matter was discovered (S.6 (3) PCA 1967). According to S.5 of the Act, complaints must be made to a MP first in writing and the investigation will only take place if the MP refers the complaint to the Commissioner for Administration to get investigated. This is called the MP-Filter. This rules gives MP’s limitless power and it is also a form of discrimination against the poor, the less educated and the less informed members of the population and therefore reform was brought forth in the Public Services Ombudsman Bill in December 2016 which states that there is no provision of MP-Filter for complaints about Central Government. According to S.5 (2) of the Act, corporate body will not be allowed to have his complaint investigated by the PCA if he has or he had the right of appeal or had any remedy from a court or tribunal. However, in Congreve court investigated into a complaint even though it had right of appeal and had remedy in a court or tribunal. S.5 (5) of the Act provides that the Commissioner shall act in accordance with his own discretion (Re Fletcher). The ombudsman has heavy advantage over the normal course of Judicial Review. The first advantage is jurisdictional, the second one is it costs less, thirdly it takes less effort on part of the applicant, next the time limit is more liberal (12 months) and lastly the remedy is mere amicable settlement between the parties.

The ombudsman cannot have any of his recommendation put into effect by the force of law because it has no legal power except the power of inquiry and has no formal power of awarding a remedy and it cannot alter a government decision. If the authority in question refuses to heed the instruction of the PCA , the PCA can formally do nothing more than making a special report to the parliament, according to S.10 (4) PCA 1967. The effectiveness of special reports made by the ombudsman to the parliament were seen in high profile cases like Sachsenhausen Affairs and Barlow Clowes Affair. Judicial accountability has been portrayed in subsequent cases by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. In the case of ex p. Dyer it has been seen that the Commissioner’s decisions are subjected to JR, although the courts will not readily interfere with the commissioner’s power of discretion. In ex p. Osthor it has been stated that where the PCA fails, the court can provide a remedy. The Select Committee also suggested that the appointment should be made by the Crown on an

address of the House of Commons and also the grounds for receiving any complaints must be given by the Ombudsman. The recent review by the Cabinet Office in 2000 recommended the restructuring of the PCA, the Local Commissioner and the Health Service Commissioner by combining the bodies into one collegiate structure of the Public Sector Ombudsman who will be able to receive complaints about any matter within jurisdiction regardless it concerned a Local Authority, The NHS or a government department. It has been an important year in terms of reforms proposals for service delivery involving public authorities.