Accountability: the second principle

Accountability: the second principle

Published January 28, 2026

Introduction

Accountability is a fundamental principle of democratic governance and ethical public administration. It expresses a simple but strong idea: those who exercise public authority must be answerable for how that authority is used, explain their actions and justify their conduct.  The Ombudsman is an institution that is there to investigate, determine and oversee administrative accountability in the public administration. Independent of Government, the Office is accessible to every person, and focused on administrative fairness. 

Effective

Effective accountability requires more than formal rules. It entails methods on how persons can question decisions, challenge maladministration, and seek remedies without fear or excessive cost.  The Ombudsman is there for this purpose as well.

The Office does not have executive powers.  Nonetheless its credibility, expertise, and moral authority are its strength.  Its recommendations are not only grounded in law but on the principles of good administration (including accountability) and fairness. This makes the Ombudsman persuasive in addressing administrative failures that can cause harm even though not illegal.

Mandate

When a complaint is lodged, a public body has to explain what it did and why.  If a complainant is right, public  officials have to explain what went wrong, revisit their reasoning, re-examine their procedures, and articulate their actions in a consistent manner.  Decisions that cannot be adequately and reasonably explained often are indicative of deeper administrative weaknesses.  These are crucial matters because public bodies exercise authority that affects the daily lives of many.

Compliance

The Ombudsman makes an assessment of compliance with standards.  He does so because accountability is not an abstract concept reserved for the academics of governance.  When an oversight institution like the Ombudsman interacts with public bodies, these are made aware that delays, mistakes, poor communication or rigid application of rules can give rise to maladministration and have negative consequences.

System change

While resolving individual complaints is essential, the broader role of the Ombudsman is to identify systemic problems.  Accountability thus becomes forward-looking : not only by the correction of past mistakes, but a commitment to prevent harm in future.

Remedial

Unlike judicial or quasi-judicial procedures, the investigations of the Ombudsman are non-adversarial, private and focused on improvement rather than blame.  Accountability becomes a shared responsibility rather than a punitive exercise.

Digital

As the public administration becomes increasingly digital, accountability faces new challenges.  Automated decision-making systems, algorithms, and data-driven governance can cover responsibility.  The risk is that people are kept back from knowing how a decision was taken, who was responsible and how to make a challenge.  Ombudsmen are increasingly called upon to ensure that accountability principles apply in digital contexts, including human oversight of automated systems and accessible remedies for digital errors.

Conclusion

Accountability gives purpose to the work of the Ombudsman, while the Ombudsman gives accountability practical and humane expression. In a complex and rapidly changing administrative landscape, the Ombudsman remains vigilant on accountable governance. Accountability is about trust, fairness, and respect. The Ombudsman stands as a quiet but enduring reminder that values like accountability are not optional, but an essential component of good administration.