Parliamentary Ombudsman Essay

Cheap Custom Writing Service

A parliamentary ombudsman is an official who has been appointed by the state to supervise public authorities and receive and investigate complaints and charges of improper government activity. In most cases, these complaints are made by individual citizens against public officials or government bodies. The stated purpose of the ombudsman is to provide an extra level of protection for the rights of citizens against actions taken by the government.

The word ombudsman is of Old Swedish origin—umbuðsmann, meaning representative—and appears in similar forms in Norwegian, Danish, and Icelandic. Although observations on the potential usefulness of an ombudsman date back to the Roman era, the origins of the modern-day ombudsman lie in eighteenth-century Sweden. King Charles XII of Sweden created the office of supreme ombudsman in 1713, an office that would eventually become the chancellor of justice. The Swedish Riksdag would later establish the parallel office of parliamentary ombudsman, an institution that survives with some modification into its present form.

The ombudsman’s role is to oversee investigations into citizen complaints of improper government activity. The ombudsman will first examine the complaint to ensure that it is not made with malicious intent and is substantial enough to stand up to further investigation, then issue a call for further evidence and evaluate the administrative action that is the subject of the complaint. If the ombudsman rules on the strength of the investigation that a particular complaint is correct in its charge of maladministration, unfair treatment, or unjust action, then the ombudsman’s office will publish a report with the results of the findings. Yet even if the report finds that maladministration has indeed taken place, ombudsmen often do not have the power to prosecute, initiate legal proceedings, or even call for specific disciplinary action against the accused official or department. Financial compensation, or even any further action apart from the published report, is at the discretion of the existing laws of the country in question.

Outside of the Scandinavian countries, parliamentary or other legislative ombudsmen are relatively recent innovations and often face restrictions not found in the original concept of the position. The United States does not have an ombudsman or equivalent office at the federal level. The United Kingdom’s parliamentary commissioner for administration, the equivalent of an ombudsman, cannot accept petitions directly from members of the public; all requests must be made through a member of Parliament, a practice which severely restricts the parliamentary commissioner’s role as a forum for direct public complaint. In contrast to these circumscribed roles, ombudsmen are becoming more common in local governments and in both the banking and health care sectors, serving as central clearinghouses of any complaints directed against these institutions.

Even though a parliamentary ombudsman may provide an essential service as an impartial official who safeguards the rights of individual citizens, the very fact that the office exists may pose problems for countries that wish to establish an ombudsman’s office. The presence of an ombudsman suggests that established, traditional avenues of complaint are inadequate to deal with public complaints of maladministration, and by extension suggests that the existing system of administration itself is not capable of providing the necessary checks on government action. Another problem faced by countries or parliaments considering the appointment of an ombudsman is the selection of an appropriate individual. An individual who has existing ties or previous experience with the institution in question may have the necessary knowledge to evaluate complaints fairly, but those connections may leave the ombudsman open to accusations of leniency or insider dealings. An individual without such connections may possess a sufficient level of impartiality to inspire public confidence, but the lack of institution-specific knowledge may render the ombudsman unable to fully assess the merits of public complaints. Nonetheless, the appointment of parliamentary ombudsmen allows a government to demonstrate a commitment to proper administration and a willingness to remain open to public accountability.

Bibliography:

  1. Ayeni,Victor, Linda Reif, and Thomas Hayden, eds. Strengthening Ombudsman and Human Rights Institutions in Commonwealth Small and Island States. London: Commonwealth Secretariat, 2001.
  2. Giddings, Philip. “Whither the Ombudsman?” Public Policy and Administration 16, no. 2 (2001): 1–16.
  3. Gregory, Roy. Righting Wrongs:The Ombudsman in Six Continents. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2000.
  4. Gregory, Roy, and Philip Giddings. The Ombudsman and Parliament: A History of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. London: Politico’s Publishing, 2002.
  5. Reif, Linda C., ed. The International Ombudsman Anthology: Selected Writings from the International Ombudsman Institute. Leiden, Neth.: Martinus Nijhoff, 1999.
  6. Senevriatne, Mary. Ombudsmen: Public Services and Administrative Justice. London: Butterworths, 2002.

This example Parliamentary Ombudsman Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.

See also:

 

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER


Always on-time

Plagiarism-Free

100% Confidentiality

Special offer!

GET 10% OFF WITH 24START DISCOUNT CODE