Ombudsman - A Critical Appraisal

" January 18, 2018
ACADEMIKE
Articles on legal issues
# Latest Medical Negligence
∠ ∠
Home > Constitutional & Administrative Law > Ombudsman: A Critical Appraisal
Ombudsman: A Critical Appraisal

SEARCH
& On December 17, 2014 ' By admin
Search SEARCH
…
by Soumik Chakraborty
Editor’s Note: An ombudsman is a person

CATEGORIES
who acts as a
trusted intermediary between either the
Select Category
state, elements of state or an organization,
and some internal or external
constituency, while representing not only
RECENT COMMENTS
but mostly the broad scope of constituent
interests. Ombudsman is etymologically
rooted in the Old ! Abhay Kant on
Divorce by mutual
Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially
consent
meaning “representative”. In its most
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

Page 1 of 44
frequent modern usage, an ombudsman is ! Shallu Vijoria on
an o\cial, usually appointed by Article 12 and 13 Of
the government or by parliament but with The Constitution Of
a signi]cant degree of independence, who India
is charged with representing the interests ! Do not wish to

of the public by investigating and disclose on
addressing complaints reported by Payment of Gratuity
individuals. Act, 1972: A Critical
Analysis
Origin and Evolution
! Nkumra on
An ombudsman is a person who acts as a Payment of Gratuity
trusted intermediary between either the state, elements Act, 1972: A Critical
of state or an organization, and some internal or Analysis
external constituency, while representing not only but
mostly the broad scope of constituent interests. ! Radhika on
Ombudsman is etymologically rooted in the Old Empowerment Of
Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially meaning Women In
“representative”. In its most frequent modern usage, an Education Sector
ombudsman is an o\cial, usually appointed by

the government or by parliament but with a signi]cant
degree of independence, who is charged with
CALENDAR
representing the interests of the public by investigating
and addressing complaints reported by individuals.
JANUARY 2018
Whether appointed by the legislature, the executive, or
an organization, the typical duties of an ombudsman are
M T W T F S S
to investigate constituent complaints and attempt to
resolve them, usually through recommendations or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
mediation. Ombudsmen sometimes also aim to identify
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
systemic issues leading to poor service or breaches of
people’s rights. At the national level, most ombudsmen 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
have a wide mandate to deal with the entire public

Page 2 of 44
sector, and sometimes also elements of the private 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
sector such as contracted service providers. In some
29 30 31
cases, there is a more restricted mandate, for example
with particular sectors of society. More recent « Oct
developments have included the creation of
specialised Children’s Ombudsman and Information
Commissioner agencies. TAGS
The ]gure of Ombudsman, with its current
characteristics, owes its origin from Sweden, however, ( ADR
its traces may be found in ancient history. In this ( agency
regards, Dr. Pickle, Director General of the Austrian ( Arbitration
Ombudsman’s O\ce has made the following ( Competition
[i]
observation in his renowned paper : – ( constitution
( constitutional law
“Institution to investigate complaints can only be seen
( contract
in the context of public administration; hence their
( contracts
history is also the history of public administration as a
( criminal law
whole. It goes back to the Koran. In the Koran itself the
( death penalty
term ‘administration’ is not used, but in many of its
( divorce
verses the principles of political and administrative
( education
system are expounded. Justice is one of the basic
( evidence ( fair
principles of Islamic Ideology.
trial ( Family Law
Before the times of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) there ( Fundamental
was no administration in the proper sense of the word. Rights ( goods
It was the Prophet who ]rst introduced administrative ( Human Rights
authorities. He appointed governors of the provinces, ( independence of
judges and tax collectors. They were all accountable to judiciary ( India
the Prophet. We have no report of complaints about ( Indian Contract Act
these institutions. As essential principles of government ( information
and administration, the Prophet bequeathed trust, technology ( insider
justice and effectiveness as well the combination of trading ( IPC
authority with responsibility. ( IPR

Page 3 of 44
It was Omer, Second Caliph of Islam, who created the ( jurisdiction
[ii]
Institution of Mohtasib . He enjoyed complete ( jurisprudence
independence and functioned within the framework of ( law ( limited
an institution called ‘hisbah’. Its role was to ensure the liability
observance of religious principles in daily life. In Egypt ( maintenance
this institution existed up to the middle of the 19th ( marriage
century. An interesting fact in this context is that the ( minor ( natural
institution of ‘hisbah’ and its functions was also justice ( patent
adopted by the Cursaders in Jerusalem; they even used ( president
the even used the Arab world ‘Mohtasib’ although they ( privacy
[iii]
changed it into ‘Mathessep’. ( Property
( Property Law
Hazrat Ali, forth Caliph of Islam, in his famous epistle to
( rape ( Right to
Malik Ashtar, the Governor of Egypt, stressed the very
information
fact in the following manner: –
( separation of
“Out of your hours of work ]x a time for complaints and powers ( tax
for those who want to approach you with their ( Transfer Of Property
grievances. For this purpose you must arrange public Act ( USA
audience for them, and during this audience, for the ( WOMEN
sake of God, treat them with kindness, courtesy and

respect. Do not let your army and police be in the
audience hall at such a time so that those who have
grievances against your government may speak to you
freely, unreservedly and without fear. All this is a
necessary factor for your rule because I have often
heard the Prophet (Peace of God be upon him) saying:
“that nation or government cannot achieve salvation
where the rights of the depressed, destitute and
suppressed are not guarded, and where mighty and
powerful persons are not forced to accede to these
[iv]
rights”.
During the Abbasids era (750-847), complaint handling

[v]

Page 4 of 44
[v]
agencies called “Diwan-al-Mazalim” were established.
Its function was to examine complaints brought by the
public against government o\cials. The institution was
headed by a senior judge responsible for examining the
grievances.
The genesis of the institution may also be found in

Sparta and Athens
Athens, where the o\ce of the “Erore”
and the “Euthynoi”, respectively controlled the activities
performed by the o\cials of government and municipal
actions. The Romans installed an o\cer called the
‘tribune’ to protect the interests and rights of the
plebeians from the patricians. In China
China, during the Yu
and Sun dynasty, an o\cer called ‘Yuan’ was appointed
to report the voice of the people to the Emperor and to
[vi]
announce the Emperor’s decrees to the people . The
Persian Empire
Empire, King Cyrus charged the “O Olho de
Rei” with the duty to supervise the activity of all his
o\cials. During the XV century, the Council of the Ten,
in Venice
Venice, had the mandate to control the bureaucratic
excesses committed in the city.
During his exile in Turkey, the King of Sweden, Charles

XII, observed the working of Dewan-i-Mazalim. On
restoration, the King ordered to establish a similar
[vii]
institution in Sweden . In Sweden the o\ce was
institutionalized in 1809 with the title of
[viii]
Justitieombudsman. According to Ibrahim al-Wahab
“of course one could not draw de]nite conclusion
regarding the origin of any institution anywhere …. But
being aware of the history of complaint handling in the
Islamic law system and the fact that during the time of
King Charles XII in Turkey this system was existing, the

Page 5 of 44
inruence seems to be evident”.
[ix]
‘Ombudsman’ is an old Swedish word that has been
used for centuries to describe a person who represents
or protects the interests of another. The word was
originally derived from medieval Germanic tribes where
the term was applied to a third party whose task was to
collect ]nes from remorseful culprit families and give
them to the aggrieved families of victims (Kircheiner,
1983). The part word, ‘man’ is taken directly from
Swedish (the old Norse word was ‘umbodhsmadr’) and
does not necessarily mean that the holder be of the
male gender. At present, there are several women, who
[x]
are part of ombudsman community worldwide.
In Sweden, the ombudsman o\ce was established by

the Parliament to assist it in its dealings with the
Executive and the Judiciary. Apparently, it may be
considered that the Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) felt
inability to satisfactorily exercise its oversight on the
activities of other branches of government. In order to
carry out its role as representative of the people, the
Swedish Parliament felt that it needed an o\cer who
could actively deal with complaints made by the public
about action being taken by Executive and the Judiciary.
In addition, the following key elements of the Swedish
form of government also led to the establishment of
ombudsman o\ce: –
1. There is no concept of Ministerial responsibility

such as exists in Parliaments based on the
Westminster system, where the minister is chosen
from the members of the Parliament.
2. In Sweden the Judiciary is a career service that is

Page 6 of 44
modeled much more closely on a traditional
executive style of decision maker and which
therefore lends itself to some of the pressures
that exist in any career and promotion based
bureaucracy.
Spread of Ombudsman Concept
The ]rst Swedish ombudsman was Lars Augustin

[xi]
Mannerheim . For more than 100 years, the o\ce
remained con]ned to Sweden and could hardly create
any ripple for other countries. Its contagion effect came
out in the twentieth century, when it was adopted in
other Scandinavian countries, in Finland (1919),
Denmark (1955) and Norway (1962). The introduction of
the Danish ombudsman, in 1955, marked the beginning
of the worldwide interest in the ombudsman
[xii]
schemes . After assuming as the ]rst Danish
Ombudsman, Professor Stephen Hurwitz, begin to write
[xiii]
and lecture about his o\ce in English . This activity
stimulated interest, which readily spread in the Anglo-
Saxon world as more and more article begin to appear
[xiv]
about ombudsman in English language publications.
Professor Larry B Hill has narrated this fact in the
following manner: –
“Mindful of the fact that his own countrymen were

insu\ciently aware of the powers and possibilities of
his newly created o\ce, professor Hurwitz energetically
engaged in a campaign of public education in his
homeland. Early successes as a lecturer abroad created
a lively demand for appearances by him at distant
places. Responding to that demand, he widened the
range of his expository and exhortatory efforts, almost

Page 7 of 44
as though he were an apostle of a new faith or perhaps
the salesman of an export commodity. His persuasive
speeches and writings, well supported by the writings of
other enthusiasts, transformed an ancient institution
into one seemingly designed speci]cally to meet
[xv]
current needs”.
The introduction of an ombudsman in New Zealand, the

]rst common law country, in 1962, sparked off a great
deal of interest in the ombudsman concept throughout
[xvi]
the world . But the question remains why Westminster
like parliamentary democracies, where the ministerial
responsibility as well as independent judiciary are
signi]cant features, have adopted the institution of
Ombudsman. This question warrants a deeper insight
into the socio-political and economic conditions of the
age, in order to understand the need and justi]cation of
this new institution.
The concept of the ombudsman evolved during the

Swedish enlightenment (1719-72) where democracy,
humanitarianism and individual liberty were
emphasized against state absolutism, injustice and
abuse or misuse of public power (Caiden, 1983). The
surge of democratic values placed prime importance
upon the personal responsibility of o\cials towards
[xvii]
their citizens. The period following World War II,
ignited considerable discussion in many countries
outside Scandinavia, regarding the establishment of a
process to examine things undertaken by the
administration, alongside and beyond the formal means
of redress available through the courts or through
[xviii]
Parliament itself, or by means of the Press. The

Page 8 of 44
ombudsman institution was established as a reply to
the major developments, taking place during the
twentieth century. These developments, inter alia,
include: –
1. Over a period of time the legislature delegated

more powers to the administration. The increase
in the discretionary powers given to the executive,
led to a need for additional protection against
administrative arbitrariness. In particular, it was
felt that there was often no redress for those
aggrieved by administrative decisions.
2. The welfare state models in many countries from
the 1930’s onward led to very large government
bureaucracies. The development of diverse and
intricate structure resulted in citizen confusion as
to what governmental jurisdiction has the
authority to resolve their problems or provide the
needed services. Whatever actions, which were
taken by the Governments to improve or
reorganize their administrations it always resulted
in increase in the size and power of the executive.
There was growing concern that a simple
independent mechanism of redress needed to be
evolved for the individual citizen. Professor D C
Rowatt has neatly expressed this concern in an
article suggesting an Ombudsman Institution in
[xix]
Canada : –
“It is quite possible nowadays for a citizen’s right to be

accidentally crushed by the vast juggernaut of the
government’s administrative machine. In this age of the
welfare state, thousands of administrative decisions are

Page 9 of 44
made each year by governments or their agencies,
many of them by lowly o\cials; and if some of these
decisions are arbitrary or unjusti]ed, there is no easy
way for the ordinary citizen to gain redress”.
1. The transition of many countries to democracy

and democratic structures of governance over the
past two decades has led to the establishment of
many more ombudsman o\ces. While
commenting on the usefulness of the institution
with respect to transition countries, Sir, John
[xx]
Robertson has written: –
“The Ombudsman institution is seen in those

countries as a valuable insurance against falling back
into old habits, and an inruential oversight organization
to ensure that the bureaucracy has a more human face”.
1. Concern for the protection of human rights, and

the growth of public education and participation
has also been major elements in the acceptance
[xxi]
of ombudsman concept globally.
2. Another important factor in the spread of
ombudsman institution is growing public demand
for greater transparency in the process of
government. Presently, it is getting impossible that
people elect a government and then allow them to
govern until the next election. “Complexity in
government business, and the wish of people to
participate more in decision making processes,
which affect the direction of their life, means that
citizen need access to information and that
governments have an obligation to facilitate
transparency and consultation, and to give
[xxii]

Page 10 of 44
[xxii]
adequate reasons for their action” .
3. In October 1991, United Nations held First
International Workshop on National Institutions
for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights
in Paris. The workshop ended up with conclusions,
known as Paris Principles. The Principles
recognized that there should be such national
institutions which can receive and act on
complaints of human rights violations. These
institutions may seek amicable settlements,
inform complainants of their rights and how to
seek redress, hear complaints or refer them to
competent authorities, and make
recommendations to solve human rights problems
including by amending laws or other acts that
obstruct the free exercise of rights. These
Principles have been extremely helpful for
governments around the world to understand how
to create an independent and impartial institution.
The Ombudsman concept provides the safeguard that

every citizen will be provided an avenue to voice his
concerns and grievances and permit opportunity for
resolution prior to seeking remedy within the costly,
cumbersome and backlogged judicial system. The
informality, low cost, rapidity of action, rexibility, ability
to enforce new policy, freedom from elaborate rules and
of evidence are the important qualities, which make the
ombudsman institution an ideal for the common man to
seek relieve against administrative excesses and to get
his grievances small or great, redressed without
[xxiii]
spending money. The role of the ombudsman is to
ensure that all public o\cials perform their duties with

Page 11 of 44
justice, honesty and public responsibility. Thus, the
ombudsman became a unique instrument to represent
the interests of citizens, protect basic human rights and
improve quality of public administration.
The ombudsman concept is one which has grown

rapidly in a variety of constitutional settings throughout
[xxiv]
the world . According to Roy and Giddings,
“Ombudsman nowadays take many different forms,
they work in different ways, and they dwell in variety of
[xxv]
habitats”. In early 1980s, Caiden et al observed in an
ombudsman study in the following manner: –
“It is found in old countries and new countries, rich

countries and poor countries, capitalist economies and
socialist economies, unitary states and federal states,
civil regimes and military regimes, states with strong
administrative law system and states with week
administrative law systems, presidential and cabinet
systems, political systems where legislators enjoy
constituents’ case work and political systems where
[xxvi]
they do not”.
By the year 2004, the ombudsman o\ce, exists in

[xxvii]
approximately 120 countries around the world. Some
countries have ombudsman o\ces at the national and
sub-national levels, such as Australia, Argentina,
Mexico, Pakistan, Spain and UK, while other nations
have ombudsman o\ces only at the subnational
government level, as in Canada, India and Italy. Another
interesting aspect of the institution can be seen from
the way this public sector institution has been
[xxviii]
‘‘ratteringly copied’’ by the private sector.

Page 12 of 44
Various Titles used for Ombudsman
A variety of names have been used to represent the

ombudsman o\ce in different countries. The titles
adopted by various countries connote diversity of
shades and focus of ombudsman o\ce. For example,
Defensordel Pueblo is the title of the ombudsman o\ce
in a number of Spanish-speaking countries i.e. Spain,
Argentina, Peru and Colombia. Parliamentary
Commissioner for Administration in Sri Lanka, United
Kingdom, Médiateur de la République in France, Gabon,
Mauritania, Senegal, Public Protector in South Africa,
Protecteur du Citoyen in Québec, Volksanwaltschaft in
Austria, Public Complaints Commission in Nigeria,
Provedor de Justiça in Portugal, DifensoreCivico in Italy,
Investigator-General in Zambia, Citizen’s Aide in Iowa,
WafaqiMohtasib in Pakistan, LokAyukta in India and
Board of Grievances in Saudi Arabia, are the titles of
some other ombudsman o\ces around the world. In a
number of countries, the protection of human rights is
one of the major purposes of the*
About ombudsman o\ce,
and this is often rerected in the name of the o\ce. For
Contact
example, in Guatemala ombudsman is known as
Procurador de los DerechosHumanos (Counsel of
)Human Rights), in El Salvador as theProcurador Para la
Defensa de los DerechosHumanos (Counsel for the
Defence of Human Rights), and in Mexico as
ComisiónNacional de DerechosHumanos (National
Commission of Human Rights). Other national level
example includes, Plenipotentiary for Human rights in
Russia, the Commission on Human Rights and
Administrative Justice of Ghana, the Civil Rights
Protector of Poland, the Human Rights Ombudsman of

Page 13 of 44
Slovenia and the Parliamentary Commissioner for
Human Rights in Hungary. The∠modus operandi of
ombudsmen, therefore, varies enormously from
impartial investigator to enabler-facilitator and broker-
[xxix]
negotiator to citizen-advocate.
The original Swedish concept of ombudsman has

proved remarkably rexible and adaptable. It has been
constantly adapted and modi]ed to suit a wide variety
of sectors and organizations. There are public sector
ombudsmen, created by statute, and private sector
ombudsmen, created as voluntary schemes, legislative
ombudsmen and executive ombudsmen, all-purpose
ombudsmen and specialized ombudsmen. Some
ombudsmen can investigate on their own initiative while
others can only respond to complaints. Apart from
classical ombudsmen, several ombudsmen like
institutions exist in private sector. In North America,
there are about 100 ombudsman o\ces in colleges and
universities, an estimated 200 in corporations. Three
dozen newspapers have an ombudsman. Nearly 4,000
hospitals have patient ombudsman o\ces and a great
many businesses have client or consumer complaint
o\ces. Each state has a nursing home/long-term cafe
ombudsman structure, and there appear to be about
1,500 part-time and full-time ombudsmen attached to
those o\ces.
The vast majority of ombudsmen operate only within a

national jurisdiction. European Community
Ombudsman, created under the Maastricht Treaty in
1995, enjoys the unique status of being one of the
supranational ombudsmen in existence. The European

Page 14 of 44
Ombudsman is responsible for investigating complaints
of maladministration in the activities of Community
institutions or bodies. The World Bank’s Inspection
Panel provides another example of an international
ombudsman-style system. The Inspection Panel was
created in 1993 to provide an independent forum for
private citizens who believe that they or their interests
have been or could be adversely affected by a project
]nanced by the World Bank and to investigate any
failures by the Bank to follow its policies and
procedures.
Characteristics and Objectives of Ombudsman

Institution
With the spread of ombudsman concept and its utility,

several surrogate institutions have emerged in the
private sector, which claim the title of ombudsman.
[xxx]
Some scholars drew distinction between, “classical”
ombudsman and other kinds of “quasi” or “executive-
ombudsman”. However, Gellhorn made clear distinction
between classical and other agencies performing the
ombudsman function. Professor Larry B Hill has
enumerated the following characteristics of the pure
[xxxi]
ombudsman :–
1. Established as separate entity that is functionally

autonomous.
2. Operationally independent of both the legislature
and the executive.
3. Ombudsman is a legally established governmental
o\cial.

Page 15 of 44
4. A monitoring specialist.
5. Administrative expert and professional.
6. Non-partisan.
7. Normatively universalistic.
8. Client-centered, but not anti-administration.
9. Popularly accessible and visible.
10. High status institutions
11. Have extensive resources to perform his mission.
Functions of Ombudsman
The core business of public sector ombudsman

remains receiving, investigation and redressal of
citizen’s complaints related to mal-administration of
government agencies or their functionaries. An
interesting feature of ombudsman institution is that it
does not compete with the courts, or act as a further
body to which those unsuccessful in the courts can
appeal. The primary function of the Ombudsman is
[xxxii]
generally to examine:
A decision, process, recommendation, act of

omission or commission which is contrary to law,
rules or regulations, or is a departure from
established practice or procedure, unless it is
bona ]de and has valid reason; is perverse,
arbitrary or unreasonable, unjust, biased,
oppressive or discriminatory; based on irrelevant
grounds; or, involves the exercise of powers or the
failure or refusal to do so for reasons of corrupt or
improper motives such as bribery, jobbery,
favouritism, nepotism, and administrative
excesses; and,
neglect, inattention, delay, incompetence,

Page 16 of 44
ine\ciency and ineptitude in the administration or
discharge of duties and responsibilities.
[xxxiii]
Professor Larry Hill has described the following six
major objectives of the ombudsman institution: –
1. To right individual wrongs.

2. To make bureaucracy more humane.
3. To lessen popular alienation from government.
4. To prevent abuses by acting as a bureaucratic
watchdog.
5. To vindicate civil servants when unjustly accused,
and
6. To introduce administrative reform.
Commenting on the role of Ombudsman, which was

challenged in 1970 in Alberta, Chief Justice Milvain
said:-
“… the basic purpose of an Ombudsman is provision of

a ‘watchdog’ designed to look into the entire workings
of administrative cases. … [he] can bring the lamp of
scrutiny to otherwise dark places even over the
resistance of those who would draw the blinds. If [his]
scrutiny and reservations are well founded, corrective
measure can be taken in due democratic process, if not
no harm can be done in looking at that which is good”.
[xxxiv]
Mr. Stephen Owen, former ombudsman of British

Columbia as well as former President of International
Ombudsman Institute, maintains that in keeping with
the general principles that it is the proper role of the
ombudsman o\ce ‘to strive for the mutually acceptable

Page 17 of 44
resolution of a problem rather than necessarily ]nding
of fault or the absence of it’. The o\ce should attempt
‘to provide informal mediation services wherever such
an approach may be productive’. This approach, he
argues, not only tends to result in greater satisfaction
among all parties, but frequently provides a more rapid
resolution than a full investigation oriented to a ]nding
of right or wrong. Similarly, Mr. Marten Oosting
observes that it is important for the ombudsman to
recognize that many of the complaints made by the
general public do not call for a full-scale investigation.
What people often want and expect, he suggests, is
direct action geared towards solving the problems that
gave rise to the grievance. The ultimate responsibility
for providing this solution lies with the relevant
government body itself. But, he says, the ombudsman
can make efforts to bring such solution closer.
Evolution of Ombudsman Functions
The increase in both the number and types of

ombudsman o\ces across the globe has also led to
signi]cant additions and modi]cations to its functions.
Some of the important changes in ombudsman
functions are discussed as follows: –
1. In Sweden, where o\cials are responsible neither

to the Crown nor to Parliament, but are subject to
the rule of law, the main functions of the
ombudsman, acting on his own initiative and
empowered to take legal proceedings against civil
servants and judges for breaches of the law was
designed to act as prosecutor. With the passage
of time the focus of the o\ce became receiving

Page 18 of 44
and investigating complaints related to
maladministration. Ulf Lundvik, former Swedish
ombudsman, pointed out, “the redress of
grievances is not main concern of the
Ombudsman”. Their main task, he says, remains
that of maintaining ‘a good standard within the
public service’.
2. In Denmark, the role of ombudsman, inter alia, was
to safeguard law and order for the individual as an
appellate institution for citizens who came into
conrict with the administrative agencies. The
ombudsman was meant to be “the protector of the
man in the street against injustice, against
arbitrariness, and against the abuse of power on
[xxxv]
the part of the executives”.
3. With the introduction of ombudsman o\ce in New
Zealand and other Commonwealth countries, the
role of ombudsman began to undergo an
important change in focus. The principle duty of
ombudsman was considered to investigate
complaints and where appropriate recommend
some form of remedial action. Therefore, the
ombudsman’s function became primarily to
redress grievances. This is equally true about
Pakistan. In UK, the statutory mandate of
Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration
authorizes him to do no more than investigate and
report. Its primary functions have been to secure
redress where complaints are justi]ed.
4. The shift of emphasis from a primary concern for
the quality of public administration to the
provision of redress in individual cases of

Page 19 of 44
injustice, by no means brought the evolution of the
ombudsman’s function to an end. In the word of
Professor Kenneth Wiltshire, “the lot of the
modern ombudsman is not simply to open the
door, the switchboard and the mail each day and
respond to complaints which waft in, many of
which have common causes elements and
generic causes”. He writes, the emphasis of the
o\ce is to be “proactive, systemic, and
[xxxvi]
preventative in its orientation”.
5. The ombudsman o\ces not only consider
individual grievances but also identify ‘systemic’
faults, thereby helping to secure improvements of
a general nature as regards working methods and
administrative practices and procedures. Martin
[xxxvii]
Oosting, has observed that a series of
separate investigations occasioned by similar
complaints may raise questions about underlying
causes. It is one of the ombudsman’s functions to
identify these causes, and where possible make
recommendations for their prevention.
6. Some ombudsmen have gone even further as
regards the promotion of good practice and
published codes of offering general guidance to
government bodies as well as the o\cials. In
Ireland, with the annual report for 1996, the
ombudsman issued a document bearing the title,
“Ombudsman’s Guide to Standards of Best
Practice for Public Servants”. In 1990, the
Ombudsman of British Columbia produces an
“Administrative Fairness Checklist”, which was to
be used in consultation with agencies to review

Page 20 of 44
their policies and practices regarding service to
the public. Some other examples include, New
South Wales’ “The Right Stuff – Tips for making
complaints and solving problems – a Toolkit for
consumers of community services in NSW”
(2004), the Commission for Local Administration
in England’s booklet, “Good Administration
Practices: Guidance on Good Practice 2” (1995),
Parliamentary Commissioner’s document, “The
Ombudsman in Your Files” (1995) and European
Union’s “Draft Code of Good Administrative
Behaviour for European Community Institutions
and Bodies”.
7. Many ombudsman o\ces are empowered to start
investigation on their own initiatives, although this
power of ‘system ]xing’ has been used sparingly.
Jacob Soderman, the European Union
Ombudsman, suggests that such ‘own motion’
powers of investigation may also be used where a
number of complaints focuses on a speci]c
administrative authority, or a particular type of
administrative activity, providing grounds for
thinking that a more general inquiry should be
conducted.
8. The ombudsman o\ces have also provided
advice to the agencies on dealing with complaints
properly. For example, the New South Wales
Ombudsman o\ce issued a 293-page
compendium entitled “The Complaint Handler’s
Toolkit” (2000), Australian Commonwealth
Ombudsman document, “Good Practice Guide for
Effective Complaint Handling” and Commission

Page 21 of 44
for Local Government Administration in England’s
publication, “Devising a Complaints System:
Guidance on Good Practice 2”.
9. Another extension to the range of ombudsman’s
functions include its new role in the promotion of
‘open government’. Most of the ombudsman
o\ces have been authorized to deal with
complaints about the way in which public bodies
have handled requests for information under the
code of practice or relevant legislation operative in
the country.
10. A number of ombudsmen have also added to their
functions a role of policing of codes. One aspect
of the generalized task of uncovering instances of
governmental corruption assigned to ombudsman
o\ces in the developing world takes the form of
responsibility from policing the application of
‘leadership codes’. In Papua New Guinea, Uganda
and Vanuatu, the duty of ombudsman include
applying the rule of ethical conduct which senior
politicians, judges and public o\cials are required
to follow.
11. The Australian Commonwealth Ombudsman and
NSW ombudsman have the responsibility for
auditing telephone intercepts records. Both o\ces
also have the responsibility of protecting ‘whistle
blowers’. The NSW ombudsman also have witness
protection function.
12. During the 1970s, the ombudsman o\ces began
to develop an approach to case handling that
diverged signi]cantly from ‘investigation and
report’ mode of operation which has characterized

Page 22 of 44
the o\ce in earlier years. The ombudsman o\ces
have increasingly focused on the possibility of
conciliation, and on helping to achieve an
outcome satisfactory to the complainant and the
agency concerned as quickly and informally as
[xxxviii]
possible. Stephen Owen maintains that the
primary role of ombudsman is ‘to strive for the
mutually acceptable resolution of a problem rather
than necessarily ]nding of faults or the absence
of it’, the o\ce should attempt ‘to provide informal
mediation services wherever such an approach
may be productive’.
Jurisdiction of the Ombudsman
The operational mode of the ombudsman varies greatly

according to the activity and environment. However, in
essence, there are two models: –
1. Reactive ombudsman who waits for complaints

and acts on what has been brought forward. In
Britain, for example, ombudsmen tend to be
reactive o\ces that can only respond to
complaints or grievances, the last port of call in a
formal complaints procedure.
2. Proactive ombudsman who seeks out matters of
concern, inspects and initiates investigations. In
Scandinavia, an ombudsman may initiate action
and has an ongoing inspection role, such as the
Public Justice Ombudsman who keeps a
watchdog eye on public administration and
tackles action to ensure acceptable quality and
standards are maintained.

Page 23 of 44
Criteria Used by Ombudsman to Judge the
O\cial Actions
Ombudsman O\ces around the world receive a bulk of

complaints each year. Out of these, a large number of
complaints are rejected on the ground that they fall
outside the ombudsman jurisdiction. Ombudsmen have
to operate within the jurisdiction set out in their
legislation. Common criteria for accepting or rejecting
complaints largely include the following questions:
1. Is the complaint within the Ombudsman’s

jurisdiction at all? (A surprising number are not.)
2. Has the person complaining exhausted the other
remedies available to them? (The Ombudsman
should be a last resort, not a ]rst port of call.) If
not, is it reasonable to expect them to have done
so?
3. Has the complainant su\cient personal interest in
the subject matter of the complaint?
4. Is the matter already before the courts? If so, is it
appropriate for the Ombudsman to become
involved?
5. On the face of the complaint, does it appear that
the person complaining is not acting in good
faith?
Ombudsmen apply various criteria for making judgment

whether a particular conduct is proper or improper.
Some of the important criteria are: –
1. Whether a particular government action concords

or conricts with statutes and principles, Ideally, an
Ombudsman approaches the action broadly and

Page 24 of 44
reviews it both in the light of the provisions of the
written law, and in the light of unwritten legal
principles, as well as, against the standards for
good governance.
2. Investigations of the action in view of the written
law include such areas relating to human and
constitutional rights, de]nitions of competence,
and provisions governing from procedure and
substance.
3. Investigation of the action in view of the unwritten
legal principles (developed in case law and legal
doctrine) are equally relevant to the lawfulness of
government conduct, and include the principles of:
equal treatment for equal cases; reasonableness;
proportionality between means and end; legal
certainty and of legitimate expectations; the
requirement to provide reasons for decisions; and,
of certain duties of care.
4. An Ombudsman also uses standards or guidelines
for good governance which contribute to the
decency of the way the executive authorities act.
The standards can be summed up as the
imposition of a broad duty of care. These are
manifested in certain accepted standards for
administrative processes and the conduct of
public servants in relation to the public. They
include the requirement to act without undue
delay; to supply the individual with relevant
information; to treat people fairly and respectfully;
and, to be unbiased and helpful.
5. Finally, the Ombudsman sets standards for the
government organization – such as those of

Page 25 of 44
coordination, monitoring of progress, protection of
the individual’s privacy, and accessibility of the
authorities.
Feedback on the quality of government services
The ombudsman o\ce provides not only for individual

redress, appeals and dispute resolution, but also an
auditing and accountability role. Ombudsmen o\ce can
make the political system more responsive to citizens
[xxxix]
both individually and collectively (Hyman, 1979, p.
151). An Ombudsman can also contribute signi]cantly
to the quality of government, by providing feedback on
the administrative performance. This is particularly
important for government organizations wishing to
perform their functions in a customer-friendly manner.
Complaints are signals, constituting a valuable source
of information for quality assurance. This feedback can
be of particular value for government organizations as
they often have a monopoly of their own and are rarely
exposed to the dynamics in the outside world.
Observing the criteria for proper conduct developed
through the O\ce of the Ombudsman can, in short,
contribute to the rationality and legitimacy of public
administration.
In this regard, a “negative feedback model of

[xl]
accountability” has been developed . The model
explains that citizen’s complaints are an important
source of evaluative feedback on public programs.
Taking public laws and policies as statements of
community goals, they set out politically agreed upon
quantity and quality of life in speci]c areas. When
citizens are disinterested in existing policies or

Page 26 of 44
regulations, or service delivery systems fail or are
inadequate, citizens are the ]rst to know. In most of the
cases citizens have no way to communicate this
information to responsible decision-makers except
through the very structures which are often root cause
of the problems. These structures, when dealing with
citizens often exhibit self-servicing interests inimical to
resolving the problem. In addition, the bureaucracies are
often the only source of information about such issues
available to elected representatives and o\cials. In
developed countries the interest groups and political
parties identify major issues, but insofar as the average
citizen is concerned, particularly in developing
countries, many problems are effectively kept out of the
decision-making process. In this situation citizen
complaints and problems are evaluative judgments that
discrepancies exist between the criteria established in
public policy and the current operation of the system.
Therefore, the demands on a generalized complaint
mechanism such as an executive ombudsman are a
form of negative feedback. For example, analysis of the
data can provide speci]c “error signals” about where
community goals and aspirations are not effectively
carried out. In this regard, the negative feedback
approach says explicitly: “let the system operate as long
as it is working fairly well. We’ll listen to the people who
pay for it (taxpayers) and those who need to use it
(consumers), when they ]nd the system fails them.”
Furthermore, third-party complaint programs are

typically called upon as a last resort, a place to appeal
when others fail (Best, 1981). And because they are
open to the general public, such mechanisms do not

Page 27 of 44
control the nature of their input. Attempts to bias input
by political elites and organized interest groups can
easily be detected. Bureaucratic obfuscation is avoided
by establishing programs which are external to
bureaucracies and directly accessible by the general
public. Thus, the character of demands is determined by
individual citizens. Patterns or trends in particularized
contacting constitute error signals or negative feedback
at the system level. This approach creates a new
channel for political demand external to bureaucracies
whereby citizens can provide inputs directly to elected
o\cials. Particularized participation mechanisms which
operate in this fashion can serve as people’s
gatekeepers to the general political and administrative
channels of the political system, and they can provide
elected representatives with an external “window” on
the bureaucratic network. When these conditions
obtain, a new open channel for political demand is
created. Third-party complaint programs become
gatekeepers to the political system. A brief example
from one such programs follows.
Lokpal- An Indian Attempt at Establishing an

Ombudsman System
A Lokpal is a proposed ombudsman in India. The word

is derived from the Sanskrit word “lok” (people) and
“pala” (protector/caretaker), or “caretaker of people.”The
concept of a constitutional ombudsman was ]rst
proposed in parliament by Law Minister Ashoke Kumar
Sen in the early 1960s. The ]rst Jan Lokpal Bill was
proposed by Shanti Bhushan in 1968 and passed in the
4th LokSabha in 1969, but did not pass through

Page 28 of 44
the RajyaSabha. Subsequently, ‘lokpal bills’ were
introduced in 1971, 1977, 1985, again by Ashoke Kumar
Sen, while serving as Law Minister in the Rajiv
Gandhi cabinet, and again in 1989, 1996, 1998, 2001,
2005 and in 2008, yet they were never passed. Forty-two
years after its ]rst introduction, the Lokpal Bill is still not
enacted in India.
The Lokpal Bill provides for the ]ling, with the

ombudsman, of complaints of corruption against
the prime minister, other ministers, and MPs.
The Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC)
recommended the enacting of the O\ce of a Lokpal,
convinced that such an institution was justi]ed, not only
for removing the sense of injustice from the minds of
citizens, but also to instill public con]dence in the
e\ciency of the administrative machinery.
Following this, the Lokpal Bill was, for the ]rst time,
presented during the fourth LokSabha in 1968, and was
passed there in 1969. However, while it was pending in
the RajyaSabha, the Lok Sabha was dissolved, and thus
the bill was not passed.
The bill was revived several times in subsequent years,

including in 2011. Each time, after the bill was
introduced to the House, it was referred to a committee
for improvements, to a joint committee of parliament, or
to a departmental standing committee of the Home
Ministry. Before the government could take a ]nal stand
on the issue, the house was dissolved again. Several
conspicuous raws were found in the 2008 draft of the
Lokpal Bill. The basic idea of a lokpal is borrowed from
the O\ce of the Ombudsman, which has the

Page 29 of 44
Administrative Reforms Committee of a lokpal at the
Centre,andlokayuktas in the states.
Anna Hazare fought to get this bill passed, and it did

pass on Dec 27, 2011, around 9:30, with some
modi]cations. These were proposed as the Jan Lokpal
Bill. However, Hazare and his team, as well as other
political parties, claimed that the Lokpal Bill passed was
weak, and would not serve its intended purpose. So the
proposed bill by the ruling Congress Party has yet to be
accepted in the RajyaSabha. As of Dec 29, 2011, the bill
has been deferred to the next parliamentary session,
amid much controversy and disruption by the LJP, RJD
and SP parties. The media at large, and the opposition
parties, claimed the situation had been staged.
Jan Lokpal Bill
The Jan Lokpal Bill or the Citizen’s Ombudsman Bill is a

draft anti-corruption bill drawn up by prominent civil
society activists, seeking the appointment of a Jan
Lokpal, an independent body that would investigate
corruption cases, complete the investigation within one
year and conduct trials for the case within the next year.
Drafted by Justice SantoshHegde ,a former Supreme

Court Judge and former Lokayukta of
Karnataka, PrashantBhushan, a Supreme Court Lawyer
and ArvindKejriwal, an RTI activist, the draft Bill
envisaged a system in which a corrupt person found
guilty would go to jail within two years of the complaint
being made and his ill-gotten wealth con]scated. It also
sought power for the Jan Lokpal to prosecute
politicians and bureaucrats without requiring

Page 30 of 44
government permission.
Retired IPS o\cer KiranBedi and others, like Anna

Hazare, Swami Agnivesh, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and
Mallika Sarabhai are also members of the movement,
called India Against Corruption. Its website describes
the movement as “an expression of collective anger of
people of India against corruption.” It goes on to state:
“We have all come together to
force/request/persuade/pressurize the Government to
enact the Jan Lokpal Bill. We feel that if this Bill were
enacted it would create an effective deterrence against
corruption.”
Anna Hazare, an anti-corruption crusader, began a fast-

unto-death, demanding that this bill, drafted by Civil
Society, be adopted. The website of the India Against
Corruption movement calls the Lokpal Bill of the
government an “eyewash”, and hosts a critique of that
government bill. It also lists the difference between the
bills drafted by the government and civil society.
Features of the Jan Lokpal Bill:
1. An institution called Lokpal at the centre

and Lokayukta in each state will be set up.
2. Like the Supreme Court and Election Commission,
they will be completely independent of
governments. No minister or bureaucrat will be
able to inruence their investigations.
3. Cases against corrupt people will not linger on for
years anymore: investigations in any case will
have to be completed in one year. Trial should be
completed in the next one year, so that the corrupt

Page 31 of 44
politician, o\cer or judge is sent to jail within two
years.
4. The loss that a corrupt person caused to the
government will be recovered at the time of
conviction.
5. If the work of any citizen is not done in a
prescribed time, in any government o\ce, Lokpal
will impose a ]nancial penalty on the guilty
o\cers, which will be given as compensation to
the complainant.
6. So, you could approach Lokpal if your ration card
or passport or voter card had not been made, or if
the police are not registering your case, or if any
other work is not being done within the prescribed
time. Lokpal will have to get it done in a month’s
time. You could also report any case of corruption
to Lokpal, like rations being siphoned off, poor
quality roads being constructed or panchayat
funds being siphoned off.
7. But won’t the government appoint corrupt and
weak people as Lokpal members? That won’t be
possible because its members will be selected by
judges, citizens and constitutional authorities, not
by politicians, through a completely transparent
and participatory process.
8. The entire functioning of Lokpal/ Lokayukta will be
completely transparent. Any complaint against
any o\cer of Lokpal will be investigated and the
o\cer dismissed within two months.
9. CVC, the departmental vigilance and anti-
corruption branch of the CBI, will be merged into
Lokpal. Lokpal will have complete powers and

Page 32 of 44
machinery to independently investigate and
prosecute any o\cer, judge or politician.
10. It will be the duty of the Lokpal to provide
protection to those who are being victimized for
raising their voice against corruption.
Fundamental duties
1. To judge the cases and make jurisdictions against

corruption cases with the Lokpal.
2. To judge whether a case is genuine or whether a
fake complaint has been made.
3. To potentially impose ]nes on a fake complaint, or
even a short span of jail time, if the case is not
proved to be legally true.
Criticisms of the Jan Lokpal Bill
A Naïve Approach-
Approach-The bill has been criticised as
being naïve in its approach to combating corruption.
According to PratapBhanu Mehta, President of the
Center for Policy Research Delhi,the bill “is premised on
an institutional imagination that is at best naïve; at
worst subversive of representative democracy”. The
very concept of a Lokpal concept has received criticism
from Human Resource
Developmentminister KapilSibal in that it will lack
accountability, be oppressive and undemocratic.
Extra Constitutional- The pro-bill

activist ArvindKejriwal rejects the claim of Lokpal being
extra-constitutional with the explanation that the body
will only investigate corruption offences and submit a
charge sheet which would then tried and prosecuted

Page 33 of 44
through trial courts and higher courts, and that other
bodies with equivalent powers in other matters exist.
The proposed bill also lists clear provisions for the
Supreme Court to abolish the Lokpal.
Despite these clari]cations, critics feel that the exact

judicial powers of Lokpal are rather unclear in
comparison with its investigative powers. The
bill requires “…members of Lokpal and the o\cers in
investigation wing of Lokpal shall be deemed to be
police o\cers”. Although some supporters have denied
any judicial powers of Lokpal, the government and
some critics have recognised Lokpal to have quasi-
judicial powers.
The bill also states that “Lokpal shall have, and exercise
the same jurisdiction powers and authority in respect of
contempt of itself as a High court has and may
exercise, and, for this purpose, the provisions of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Central Act 70 of 1971)
shall have the effect subject to the modi]cation that the
references therein to the High Court shall be construed
as including a reference to the Lokpal.”Review of
proceedings and decisions by Lokpal is prevented in the
bill by the statement “…no proceedings or decision of
the Lokpal shall be liable to be challenged, reviewed,
quashed or called in question in any court of ordinary
Civil Jurisdiction.”. As a result, how the trials will be
conducted is unclear in the bill, although the bill outlines
requiring judges for special courts, presumably to
conduct trial that should be completed within one year.
The critics hence express concern that, without judicial
review, Lokpal could potentially become an extra-

Page 34 of 44
constitutional body with investigative and judicial
powers whose decisions cannot be reviewed in regular
courts.
Scope- The matter of whether the Indian Prime

Minister and higher judiciary should or should not be
prosecutable by the Lokpal remains as one of the major
issues of dispute. Anna’s own nominee for co-chairing
the joint panel Justice Verma, the former Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court, has expressed his constitutional
objections for including the Prime Minister and higher
judiciary under Lokpal.According to him, “this would foul
with the basic structure of the constitution”.
Criticism from the CBI Director- The CBI Director, in

a presentation before the Standing Committee of the
Parliament, has strongly argued against the vivisection
of the CBI and merger of its anticorruption wing with the
Lokpal, noting that this would seriously cripple the core
functioning of the CBI and reduce it to irrelevance. An
organization built over last 60 years comprising
competent professionals should not be subsumed
under Lokpal. CBI o\cers concede that in some
sensitive political cases there is of course interference
from the government, but in respect of an overwhelming
majority of cases CBI functions, unfettered and
uninruenced by extraneous considerations. For this
reason there is an ever increasing demand for CBI
investigation from all-over the country in respect of
important cases.
Critical Observations on Ombudsman Scheme
The most common criticism of the ombudsman system

Page 35 of 44
is that the function is not generally well understood.
There is relatively limited documentation and
information about their work, often confusion and
uncertainty about their role, and with the proliferation of
ombudsman o\ces in different sectors, the confusion
can be exacerbated. In spite of the key characteristic of
accessibility, ombudsman o\ces are frequently noted
for their inaccessibility. Few citizens are aware of the
different ombudsman schemes, how to reach them and
how to process a grievance. Inaccessibility is the chief
reason why ombudsman o\ces tend to be under-
utilised, especially by the most disadvantaged who are
less likely to know of the existence of ombudsman and
have more di\culty in registering complaints or
grievances. It seems that many ombudsman schemes,
particularly in Britain, are hidden by bureaucracy and
formality and lack a human face. The question of
visibility is linked to more general criticisms of the
operational mode of the ombudsman as too reactive,
waiting for complaints rather than taking the o\ce to
the public or initiating investigations.
The ombudsman o\ce is also criticized for the fact that

its effectiveness tends to depend upon the character
and personality of the ombudsman o\cer(s)
themselves rather than the system as a whole.
Regardless of their organizational framework they are a
highly personalized institution and success demands an
individual or team who are perceived as independent
and impartial, with relevant quali]cations and in-depth
knowledge of the sector, and can command respect and
trust from all parties. Of course, such individuals are
hard to ]nd.

Page 36 of 44
Since the ombudsman’s powers lie essentially in
recommendation there is a genuine concern that the
ombudsman lacks ‘teeth’. For instance, the annual
report (for many ombudsmen the only public document
issued) is often considered an inadequate instrument
for inruencing administration procedures and practice,
informing mass media and educating the public.
Moreover, the ombudsman is generally powerless to
change or reverse decisions. In fact, some believe that
the ombudsman’s powers as critic and reformer must
be strengthened to inruence changes in legislation and
policy and not just administrative procedure. The
ombudsman should be concerned not merely with laws
or codes as they stand, but also as they might be.
Edited by Saksham Dwivedi

[i]“The Ombudsman and Administrative Reforms” by Dr.
Pickl.
[ii]Mohtasib means a person, who conducts

accountability. Its function was to be a guardian of
public morals in many ]elds of life, especially in the
towns and above all in the market place. He was the
market supervisor, the Sahib as-sup, as well as the
settler of disputes.
[iii] Quoted from WafaqiMohtasib (Ombudsman)’s

Annual Report 1990 p.6-7
[iv]Mohtasib (Ombudsman)’s Annual Report. Almost all

the reports have quoted this important excerpt of the
letter. Also see NehjulBalagha, a collection of the
speeches and writings of Hazarat Ali (AS)

Page 37 of 44
[v]Diwan means an o\ce, secretariat or an o\cial
agency.
[vi]Satyanand, Anand, Growth of the Ombudsman

Concept, Journal of South Paci]c Law, article 1 of
Volume 3, 1999, School of Law, University of south
Paci]c. Also see Argentine Ombudsman website.
[vii]WafaqiMohtasib Annual Report 1998.
[viii]WafaqiMohtasib Annual Report 1990.
[ix]An Ombudsman Overview, David Peppiatt, Project

Researcher, Brie]ng Paper for The Ombudsman Project
Inter-agency Steering Group Meeting on November 21,
1997 at British Red Cross.
[x]Satyanand, Anand Judge, Ibid.
[xi] Parliamentary Ombudsman of Finland’ website

http://www.oikeusasiamies.]/Resource.phx/eoa/english/ombudsman/
…
[xii]Seneviratne Mary, Ombudsman 2000, professorial

inaugural lecture, given on 17 April 2000.
[xiii]Lundvik Ulf, New Zealand, International Anthology of

Ombudsman 1983.
[xiv] See S. Hurwitz, “Control of the Administration in

Denmark: The Danish Parliamentary Commissioner for
Civil and Military Government Administration,” Journal
of the International Commission of Jurists (1958); 224-
43; also printed in Public Law, 1958, PP 236-53.
[xv]Hill Larry B, “The Model Ombudsman,

Page 38 of 44
Institutionalizing New Zealand’s Democratic
Experiment”, Princeton University Press, 1976.
[xvi]Seneviratne Mary Ibid.
[xvii]Kirchheiner H.H. “The Ideological Foundation of the

Ombudsman Institution”.Ch.2, p.23.
[xviii]Satyanand, Anand Ibid.
[xix]Rowatt, D C, No 28 Canadian Journal of Economics

and Political Science. P.543.
[xx] The Ombudsman and the World by Sir John

Robertson KCMG CBE, Twenty Years of Commonwealth
Ombudsman 1977-1997, Commonwealth Ombudsman,
Canberra, June 1997. P.67.
[xxi]D. Rowat, The Ombudsman Plan (University Press of

America, 1985), at p. 131.
[xxii]Sir John Roberson Ibid.
[xxiii]A Commentary on Ombudsman, Law, Scope and

Prospects by Mobeen Ahmed Khan, Asia Law House
Karachi. 2001
[xxiv]Satyanand, Anand, Ibd
[xxv]Gregory Roy and Giddings Philip, “The Ombudsman,

The Citizen and Parliament”, A History of the O\ce of
the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration and
Health Service Commissioners, Politico’s Publishing, 8
Artillery Row, London, SW1p 1RZ 2002.
[xxvi]Caiden, MacDermot and Sandler, ‘The Institution of

the Ombudsman”

Page 39 of 44
[xxvii] International Ombudsman Institute website
“www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/ioi/eng/eng_home.html
[xxviii]H. Woolf, Protection of the Public – A New

Challenge, Hamlyn Lecture (Stevens, 1990), at p. 87.
[xxix]Mora Atonio, “El Libro Del Defensor Del Pueblo”

Defensor Del Pueblo, Madrid 2003. P.185-189
[xxx]Hill, B Larry and Stanley Anderson.
[xxxi] “American Ombudsmen and ‘Wannabe’

Ombudsmen” by Larry B. Hill, Address delivered at the
1997 Spring Meeting of the American Bar Association
Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice,
Hotel Washington, Washington D.C.
[xxxii]Establishment of the O\ce of WafaqiMohtasib

(Ombudsman) Order 1983, Presidential Order No.1 of
1983. (Amended and updated vide Ordinance No. LXXII
of 2002)
[xxxiii] Larry B Hill, The Model Ombudsman:

Institutionalizing New Zealand’s Democratic Experiment
(Princeton, N. J.: Princeton university Press, 1976)
[xxxiv] Read Ombudsman Act (1970) (72 WWR 176, 190

and 192)
[xxxv] Lars Nordskov Nielsen, Danish Ombudsman,

International Handbook of Ombudsman Ch. 3,
“Denmark”.
[xxxvi] Kenneth Wiltshire, Report of the Strategic Review

of the Queensland Ombudsman (Queensland
Government) 1998, p.32.

Page 40 of 44
[xxxvii]Formerly President of the International
Ombudsman Institute and National Ombudsman of the
Netherlands.
[xxxviii]Former Ombudsman of British Columbia and

Former President of International Ombudsman Institute.
[xxxix] “Participation Through Hot-lines and Citizen’s

Advocates,” by Drew Hyman in S. Langton, ed. Citizen
Participation Perspectives, Medford, Mass.: Lincoln
Filene Center, (1979), P. 151.
[xl] “Citizen Complaints as Social Indicators: The

Negative Feedback Model of Accountability” by Drew
Hyman, The Ombudsman Journal, November 6, 1987.
Website
“http://csisweb.aers.psu.edu/PUBLICATIONS/complaints.htm”
Related Posts:
Institution of
Ombudsman-A
Legislative and
Judicial Outlook Issue 1
Board Committees and

Lok Adalats it’s Importance

Page 41 of 44
Federalism – The
Indian Constitutional Concept Of Waqf
Context Under Muslim Law
An Expansive
De]nition of ‘State’: Doctrine Of
Need… Sovereignty
, Constitutional & Administrative Law , -
administrative ,
PREVIOUS POST
Critical Appraisal Of Information Technology Act
NEXT POST
Discharge By Performance & Contingent

Contracts
One Reply to “Ombudsman: A

Critical Appraisal”
kiran says:
May 15, 2017 at 3:41 pm
Really helpful. .

Page 42 of 44
Thank u soo much…????
REPLY
Leave a Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required ]elds
are marked *
Comment
Name *
Email *
Website
POST COMMENT

Page 43 of 44
RECENT POSTS
∠ The setting red sun of dark water
∠ Medical Negligence
∠ Promissory Estoppel
∠ Concept Of Waqf Under Muslim Law
∠ Rights of Juvenile in India
DISCLAIMER
NOTE: Articles published on this website are for information only. They do not construe legal advice.
Copyright © All right reserved. | Theme: OnlineMag by eVisionThemes

Page 44 of 44

Ombudsman - A Critical Appraisal

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Ombudsman - A Critical Appraisal

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

" January 18, 2018

# Latest Medical Negligence

Ombudsman: A Critical Appraisal

Editor’s Note: An ombudsman is a person

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

is charged with representing the interests ! Do not wish to

Ombudsman is etymologically rooted in the Old Empowerment Of

Norse word umboðsmaðr, essentially meaning Women In

“representative”. In its most frequent modern usage, an Education Sector

ombudsman is an o\cial, usually appointed by

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

Before the times of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) there ( Fundamental

was no administration in the proper sense of the word. Rights ( goods

It was the Prophet who ]rst introduced administrative ( Human Rights

authorities. He appointed governors of the provinces, ( independence of

the Prophet. We have no report of complaints about ( Indian Contract Act

these institutions. As essential principles of government ( information

and administration, the Prophet bequeathed trust, technology ( insider

justice and effectiveness as well the combination of trading ( IPC

authority with responsibility. ( IPR

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

independence and functioned within the framework of ( law ( limited

an institution called ‘hisbah’. Its role was to ensure the liability

observance of religious principles in daily life. In Egypt ( maintenance

this institution existed up to the middle of the 19th ( marriage

century. An interesting fact in this context is that the ( minor ( natural

institution of ‘hisbah’ and its functions was also justice ( patent

adopted by the Cursaders in Jerusalem; they even used ( president

sake of God, treat them with kindness, courtesy and

During the Abbasids era (750-847), complaint handling

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

The genesis of the institution may also be found in

During his exile in Turkey, the King of Sweden, Charles

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

In Sweden, the ombudsman o\ce was established by

1. There is no concept of Ministerial responsibility

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

Spread of Ombudsman Concept

The ]rst Swedish ombudsman was Lars Augustin

“Mindful of the fact that his own countrymen were

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

The introduction of an ombudsman in New Zealand, the

The concept of the ombudsman evolved during the

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

1. Over a period of time the legislature delegated

“It is quite possible nowadays for a citizen’s right to be

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

1. The transition of many countries to democracy

“The Ombudsman institution is seen in those

1. Concern for the protection of human rights, and

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

The Ombudsman concept provides the safeguard that

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

The ombudsman concept is one which has grown

“It is found in old countries and new countries, rich

By the year 2004, the ombudsman o\ce, exists in

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

A variety of names have been used to represent the

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

The original Swedish concept of ombudsman has

The vast majority of ombudsmen operate only within a

https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/ 19/01/18, 12>55 AM

Characteristics and Objectives of Ombudsman