In an era where good governance, accountability and transparency are increasingly demanded by the public, the role of an ombudsman has become indispensable in many democratic nations. Yet in Bangladesh, the potential of this office remains largely untapped. Despite being enshrined in the constitution, the ombudsman鈥檚 office has yet to be effectively established and empowered, leaving a critical gap in our checks and balances.
听
Constitutional framework and shortcomings
Article 77 of Bangladesh鈥檚 constitution provides for the legal framework for establishing the office of the ombudsman. The provision empowers the parliament to create the office, define its powers and oblige the ombudsman to investigate actions by ministries, public officers or statutory public authorities. The ombudsman is also required to submit an annual report to the parliament. However, despite this constitutional provision, the office remains largely ineffective, with the Ombudsman Act 1980 has still not been fully implemented.
The framers of the constitution recognised the importance of an ombudsman in ensuring government accountability and safeguarding citizens鈥� rights. Yet more than five decades after the constitution鈥檚 adoption, Bangladesh still lacks a functional ombudsman, highlighting a significant shortfall in the governance structure. This absence is especially concerning given the widespread challenges of corruption, maladministration and lack of accountability that persist in various layers of the government.
听
Global perspectives
IT IS useful to examine how other countries have successfully used this institution to understand the potential of the ombudsman.
The Swedish model, one of the oldest, offers a comprehensive blueprint. Established in 1809, the Swedish ombudsman is empowered to investigate complaints against government officials, including judges, ensuring that laws are faithfully executed. The ombudsman鈥檚 office in Sweden can initiate investigations on its own, recommend legal action and, even, prosecute officials for the dereliction of duty.
In Finland, the parliamentary ombudsman, established in 1919, works in tandem with the chancellor of justice to oversee public administration. The Finnish ombudsman鈥檚 jurisdiction extends to all public officials, including in the judiciary, ensuring a high level of accountability across government branches. The ability of the Finnish ombudsman to investigate even the action of the judiciary speaks about the robust nature of this institution in safeguarding public interests.
Denmark鈥檚 ombudsman, established in 1955, has jurisdiction over civil and military administration and operates with significant independence from the government. The Danish model underscores the importance of the ombudsman in addressing complaints of maladministration, a function critical to maintaining public trust in government institutions. The Danish ombudsman is also known for its proactive role in not only addressing individual complaints but also identifying systemic issues that require legislative or administrative reforms.
New Zealand鈥檚 ombudsman, established in 1962, was the first in the common law world and serves as an officer of the parliament. The New Zealand ombudsman鈥檚 role includes investigating government action, reporting to the parliament and recommending remedies for maladministration. The success of this institution in New Zealand has led to its replication in other common law countries, including the United Kingdom and Australia.
These examples underscore the global recognition of the ombudsman as a vital institution for promoting good governance and protecting citizens鈥� rights. They also highlight the missed opportunities in Bangladesh, where the absence of an effective ombudsman has allowed corruption and maladministration to go unchecked.
听
Power and potential of ombudsman
AN EFFECTIVE ombudsman in Bangladesh could play a crucial role in addressing many of the governance challenges that we face today. The ombudsman would have the power to investigate complaints of maladministration, corruption and the abuse of power by public officials. This office could serve as a critical watchdog, ensuring that government actions are transparent, lawful and in the public interests.
The ombudsman could also address issues that are beyond the reach of existing institutions. For instance, it could investigate allegations of corruption that are often difficult to prove through conventional legal means because of the lack of direct evidence. By focusing on the consequences of corruption such as unexplained wealth or the misuse of public funds, the ombudsman could help to expose and address such issues.
Moreover, the ombudsman could play a significant role in protecting rights of vulnerable groups, including minorities, women and the poor, by ensuring that their grievances are heard and addressed. This would enhance public trust in government institutions and contribute to social justice.
Additionally, the ombudsman could act as a mediator in disputes between citizens and government agencies, helping to resolve issues without the need for lengthy and costly litigation. This role has been particularly effective in countries such as Sweden and New Zealand, fostering a culture of dialogue and compromise between the government and the public.
听
Limitations of current ombudsman framework
DESPITE its potential, the current framework for the ombudsman in Bangladesh is riddled with limitations. The most glaring of them is the narrow scope of jurisdiction defined in the Ombudsman Act 1980. The law restricts the ombudsman to investigating only the action of public officers, excluding ministers, members of parliament and judges from its purview. This exclusion significantly undermines the ombudsman鈥檚 ability to hold the most powerful officials accountable.
Another critical limitation is the absence of any binding authority. The ombudsman can only make recommendations, which the government is not obliged to follow. This lack of enforcement power is a significant barrier to the ombudsman鈥檚 ability to effect meaningful change and ensure accountability.
Additionally, the exclusion of corruption from the ombudsman鈥檚 jurisdiction severely hampers its effectiveness. In a country where corruption is pervasive, any institution designed to promote good governance must have the authority to investigate and address corrupt practices. Without this power, the ombudsman risks being nothing more than a symbolic office.
The lack of a clear mandate for public outreach and education is another significant limitation. Without this function, the ombudsman in Bangladesh would struggle to gain the trust and support of the public, which is essential for the effectiveness of the institution.
听
Historical perspective
THE reasons for the non-enforcement of the ombudsman in Bangladesh are multifaceted, involving both political and bureaucratic resistance. The political will to establish this office has been consistently lacking, particularly given the concentration of power to the executive branch, which has historically been reluctant to create institutions that could challenge its authority.
Moreover, there has been a lack of public demand for the establishment of the ombudsman, partly because of a lack of awareness about the role and potential benefits of such an institution. In Bangladesh, the concept of the ombudsman remains relatively unfamiliar to ordinary people, limiting the pressure on political leaders to act. Finally, the political instability and frequent changes in government have also contributed to the delay in establishing the ombudsman. Each new administration has had its priorities and the establishment of the ombudsman has not been among them.
听
Challenges for interim government
IN THE context of an interim government, the challenges of establishing the ombudsman are particularly acute. Limited time, resources and political capital make it difficult to establish a new institution such as the ombudsman鈥檚 office. Additionally, the establishment of the ombudsman could be perceived as politically sensitive, leading to resistance from political actors.
Broad political and public support is essential for an effective establishment of the ombudsman. The interim government would need to engage in extensive consultations with political parties, civil society and the public to build consensus.
The success of the ombudsman institution hinges significantly on the individual appointed to this critical role. The ombudsman must embody the highest standards of integrity, independence and impartiality to effectively uphold the principles of justice and accountability. Several distinguished figures in Bangladesh stand out as exemplary candidates for this role.
In addition to having a distinguished background, the ombudsman must be accessible and responsive to the public. This role demands a commitment to championing transparency, accountability and good governance while ensuring the protection of all citizens鈥� rights, particularly the most vulnerable. The appointment of a capable and respected individual to this position is not only a legal requirement but also a moral imperative to restore faith in public institutions and ensure that justice is served for all.
听
Plea for engagement
THE establishment of an effective ombudsman in Bangladesh is not only necessary but also urgent. It can play a pivotal role in ensuring accountability, transparency and good governance. The interim government has a unique opportunity to address the historical shortcomings and set the stage for a robust ombudsman institution that aligns with the principles of democracy and human rights.
There must be concerted efforts to reform the Ombudsman Act, engage stakeholders and appoint individuals of integrity and experience to the position to achieve this. By doing so, Bangladesh can take significant strides towards improving governance, restoring public trust and, ultimately, enhancing the rule of law.
听
Kollol Kibria ([email protected]) is an advocate at Dhaka judges court and political and human rights activist.
