Is a Government Institution created to examine complaints of inefficient administration, corruption and unjustified treatment by over 3 countries public authorities or official against citizens?
Modern governments have grown in complexity and affect people’s lives in diverse ways. This has led to numerous cases of administrative injustices which can best be remedied through the ombudsman’s office. The ombudsman has come to fight the cause of the unfortunate who are victims of unfair actions of the administration in circumstances that they cannot go to court. The rationale behind the establishment of this grievance redress system stems from the background that the various forms of redress provided by the legal system to check the excesses of the administration are inadequate because they are fraught with a number of defects that make the realization of full justice impossible in most cases. The limitations in the formal system of administration of justice through the courts which justify the establishment of the ombudsmen include the technical and formalized system of judicial settlement as opposed to the informal and flexible system of the ombudsmen.
In addition, court processes are protracted and very expensive, and victory may be pyrrhic.
Judicial settlement is usually not amicable and may produce a victor and vanquished. In some cases, the amount in dispute may be too infinitesimal to justify going to court. And an administrative action may be legal but unfair.
35
There is therefore the need for the ombudsmen to exercise control over the activities of government officials with little effort and less expense on the part of the Government and thereby supplement the various legal and internal administrative devices which have failed to adequately guarantee administrative justice.
The ombudsman as an institution started its life from Sweden since 1809. It was from there transplanted to Denmark and other neighboring countries.
In 1971, Finland established the office of Ombudsman. In 1962, New Zealand became the first English speaking country to establish the office of the ombudsmen outside the Scandinavian countries. In 1996, Tanzania, established the permanent commission of inquiring, while in 1967 Britain established the parliamentary commissioner for Administration. By 1995 about 75 countries of the world have established some sort of public watch – dog to protect its citizens from administrative injustice/maladministration.
The public complaints commission in Nigeria was established under Decree 31 of 1975 (amended by Decree 21 of 1979) and also known as Ombudsman.
Although 1975 was the year the commission was established Nationwide by the Federal Military Government, it should however be noted that historical counterparts to the commission predated the October 1975 enactment. For instance, while Edict No. 5 of 1st April 1974 established the Kaduna State public complaint Bureau. The call for the institution of the ombudsman in Nigeria was made in the Report of the Public service panel (Udorji report).
The Following are the Powers and Duties of the Commission
(1) The Commission is empowered to investigate either on his own initiative or following complaints lodged before him by any person, any administrative action taken by; any Department or Ministry of the Federal State or Local Government Authority etc.
(2) The commission has access to all information necessary for the efficient performance of its duties under the Act and for this purpose may visit and inspect any premises belonging to any person or body.
(3) The commission is empowered to ensure that all administrative actions by any person or body within its jurisdiction will not result in the commitment of any of injustice against any citizen of Nigeria or any other person resident in Nigeria.
It is important to note that in exercise of the powers conferred upon a commissioner, he shall not be subject to the direction of any body or person
36
required by a commissioner to furnish information to comply with such within 30 days.
The Commissioner however has no Powers to Investigate Matters Contained in Section 6(1) and they include:
(1) Matters clearly outside its terms of reference that are pending before any court of law in Nigeria, National Assembly the National Council of ministers or of State.
(2) Matters relating to anything done or purported to be done in respect of any member of the Armed Forces in Nigeria or the Nigeria Police force under the Nigerian Army Act, the Navy Act, the Air Force Act or the Police Act.
(3) Matters in which the complainant on the opinion of the commissioner have not exhausted all available legal or administrative procedures or relating to any act or thing done before 29th July, 1975 or where the complainant has no personal interest.
PROBLEMS OF THE COMMISSION
The following problems hamper the effective operations of the public complaints commission as grievance redress mechanism
(1) The commission is inadequately staffed (2) It tacks basic office equipment and facilities
(3) It does not give binding decisions only recommendation and its jurisdiction is limited, that is, can only investigate and make recommendations.
(4) The requirement of exhaustion will shut and many complaints.
(5) The limitation period is not reasonable in view of the requirement of exhaustion of other remedies.
(6) Lack of public awareness of its existence and activities.
(7) Lack Secrecy
4.0 CONCLUSION
The National Human Rights Commission and the public complaint commission are the other various bodies saddled with the responsibility of enforcing human rights although not judicially they have been an effective mechanism taking cognizance of some of the defects of the judicial means.
37 5.0 SUMMARY
These bodies are not without their problems but if well managed by the appropriate authorities will enhance the enforcement of Human Rights in Nigeria curbing all the difficulties encountered in adopting the judicial enforcement.