The Parliamentary Ombudsman addresses the International Conference of Ombudsman in Cassino
Published September 12, 2024
The Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon, addressed the International Ombudsman Conference being held in Cassino, Italy, on the 12th and 13th of September.
Ombudsmen and human rights defenders from around the world are discussing matters related to human rights and public administration. The Ombudsman participated in the panel titled ‘Human Rights in Global Crisis: The Role of the Ombudsman.’
The full text of his speech is reproduced below:
Speech by the Parliamentary Ombudsman of Malta
Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon
during the International Conference of Ombudsman
Cassino, 12th September 2024
THE OMBUDSMAN & HUMAN RIGHTS
Not all Ombudsmen around the world are also defenders of human rights. This should not remain the case as a matter of principle.
The primary function of an Ombudsman is to investigate acts or omissions of bodies that directly or indirectly form part of Government. The Office makes recommendations when it finds that any acts or omissions of Government are unreasonable, unjust, oppressive, or improperly discriminatory, in substance breaches of a person`s fundamental rights.
Historically the Office of Ombudsman was not intended to be a human rights body. Nonetheless human rights are at the heart of the work of public services Ombuds offices. The Office is a core component of the safeguards that persons should enjoy in a democratic state. By taking a human rights based approach, Ombudsmen can put the rights of persons as a focal point of their work. When things have been done wrong by Government, justice must be done whatever it takes. A human rights based approach ensures that Government policies, processes and actions are shaped to protect human rights.
In essence this is what the rule of law is all about.
As EU Ombudsman Mrs Emily O`Reilly stated in a strong keynote speech delivered in Brussels on the 13 May 2024 although in a different context :
“The rule of law is the operating system of democracy, the engine. When it functions well, it purrs away in the background unobtrusively. We take notice only when it fails.”
Today many Ombudsman Offices are also their country`s National Human Rights Institutions. To date this is not the case of Malta. When we investigate bad administration by the public service, and come across breaches of human rights, we can only highlight such findings in the report we submit, but we have to stop there. We are not empowered to refer the matter to the Constitutional Court for an appropriate ruling, as is the case in some countries. Maybe this can be an issue worth delving into further when the long awaited Convention is constituted for a Reform of the Constitution of Malta.
When an Ombudsman has within his remit the power to embark on “own initiative investigations”, as is the case of Malta, what more suited can that power be translated into than when there are alleged breaches of a person`s fundamental rights, in many a situation when the person who sustains alleged breaches is hesitant to make a formal complaint ?
These are the situations for which a diligent Ombudsman should keep a careful watch for. Many a time, without his action, breaches would persist, especially in the case of vulnerable persons in the community or others who for a million reasons are without a voice.
When Ombudsmen do the right thing and investigate “tooth and nail” without cutting at corners when the rights of people are in jeopardy, they should find the support from us all in the Ombudsman community.
Two examples :
The former Ombudsman for Slovakia, Dr Jana Dubovcová, used her own-initiative powers to investigate the decision to place Roma children, without intellectual disabilities, into schools for children with special needs. The Ombudsman concluded that the decision was not taken on educational grounds, but in fact constituted racial discrimination. The Ombudsman sought to lay her report before the National Council of Slovakia. The Council refused to discuss the report. Following this refusal, the IOI intervened with the President of Parliament and ultimately the report was discussed.
Dr Adam Bodnar, Polish Ombudsman between 2015 and 2021, appointed a Deputy to address LGBTQ issues. In response, the Government sought to drastically reduce his budget. He also spoke out about hate speech following the killing of the Mayor of Gdansk. He was sued as an individual by the State TV Company. The IOI sent a delegation to Poland to meet with key players, including NGOs, Government Ministers, the judiciary and international agencies. A formal report was launched at a press conference, which received very considerable media coverage in Poland. The positive result was that the budget was not cut in the manner that had been threatened. Dr Bodnar is now Minister of Justice in the Government led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk.
It is a proven fact that in its operations the classical Ombudsman model compliments the work of the Courts of Justice and can be a safe alternative as it is independent, objective and free of charge. The Office can shield people from acts of injustice and unfairness. The Office can intervene when a court would find no failing. This is one of the important intrinsic advantages of the Ombudsman.
Our staff are already alert to the possibility that the action of a public service provider may have breached a complainant’s human rights, even if it would not otherwise have been considered to be maladministration because there was no breach of law or procedure.
And they respond accordingly.
Having independent bodies allows focus on the protection of rights when other voices are suppressed.
The remarkable strength of the Ombudsman is his focus on persons and their stories. We draw our views and our strength from our casebooks. That provides the authority for our interventions.
The Office adds vigour and flavour to democracy. The Ombudsman keeps the public administration under check not only to balance any act or omission unjustly perpetrated, but also and, by no means less important, to enable the public administration to change what requires change, to make its people and standards more accountable, to adjust whatever requires adjustment, to avoid wrong decisions and place justice as its prime mover.
One final point :
The Ombudsman has proved to be a hugely successful Office for holding Government to account.
Not only has the Office helped persons achieve redress but has also brought about improvements to public services and the law.
Crucial is the value of trust in the institution.
People will vouch for the institution when through example the institution shows that it will not succumb to any sort of pressure from the public administration, although a respectful non-necessarily confrontational relationship with the public administration does not in any manner whatsoever affect trust.
To be successful, the Office has to continue to be innovative and evolve in the face of the changing challenges and opportunities.
That is our mission.
Thank you.
