Abstract
The history of the Ombudsman, or ombudsman, as it was originally called and is still called today by the overwhelming number of institutions and scholars, dates back to nineteenth century Sweden. In 1809, the Swedish Parliament made the decision to appoint an Ombudsman to “supervise the King, his offices and courts for the Riksdag”. Nowadays, the typical Ombudsman has responsibilities which go far beyond these tasks. Much has been written about the history of the Ombudsman in recent years. When looking at different categories of institutions, scholars define up to five different types which will be described in more detail later.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In Swedish, the term “Ombud” means “representative”, cf Reif (2004b), p. 12 and is also used in English. Black’s Law Dictionary dates the first use of the term in English for 1872.
- 2.
For a discussion of the terminology cf Sect. 1.2.3, p. 12 below. The term “Ombudsperson Institution” as official title is for example used by the Institution in Kosovo which was originally established by the United Nations (UN) Mission in Kosovo under UN Security Council Resolution 1244. Cf http://www.ombudspersonkosovo.org/new/?id=10,0,0,1,e,0.
- 3.
For more details cf Stern (Sweden) (2008), p. 411.
- 4.
- 5.
Cf Sect. 1.2.3.2, p. 13 below.
- 6.
- 7.
Cf Reif (2004b), p.4.
- 8.
Cf Sect. 2.2 , p. 23 for a short overview of the different functions.
- 9.
Cf Jacoby (1999), p. 15.
- 10.
The Finnish Institution is closely modelled on the Swedish original, whereas neither the Danish nor the Norwegian model include powers for the oversight over the judiciary and prosecution, cf Reif (2004b), p. 2 for more details.
- 11.
Cf Reif (2011), p. 270.
- 12.
Information provided by the General Secretariat of the IOI as of 26 April 2012.
- 13.
Cf Koo and Ramirez (2009), p. 1324.
- 14.
Cf Keith (2005), p.10.
- 15.
Cf Keith (2005), p. 9 et seq.
- 16.
Cf Reif (2011), p. 281 et seq. for details on these developments.
- 17.
Cf Koo and Ramirez (2009), p.1326.
- 18.
Cf Giddings et al. (2000), p. 443 et seqq. for further details.
- 19.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 393.
- 20.
This conference also celebrated the Bicentennial of the Swedish Ombudsmen.
- 21.
Hammarberg (2009).
- 22.
Pillay (2009).
- 23.
Pillay (2009).
- 24.
Cf below Sect. 1.2.3.1, p. 12 for details on the definitions used.
- 25.
Adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966, cf http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/ccpr.htm.
- 26.
The ICCPR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) are the most important human rights covenants, signed and ratified by most jurisdictions in the world. They stipulate a comprehensive list of civil and political rights as well as of economic, social and cultural rights. Taiwan and Tonga have not ratified the covenants, however, cf report on Taiwan, Chap. 7 , p. 259 for details on the covenants’ legal effect in Taiwan. China has ratified the ICESCR and signed (but not yet ratified) the ICCPR. All other jurisdictions examined in this study are bound by the covenants.
- 27.
None of these standards is based on an enforceable legal instrument, they are all soft law.
- 28.
In Europe, for example, the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe act as standard setters, cf Reif (2004b), p. 125 et seq. for more details.
- 29.
The United Nations Economic and Social Council established under Chapter X of the Charter of the United Nations.
- 30.
Replaced in 2006 by the UN Human Rights Council.
- 31.
The draft guidelines were endorsed by both the UN Commission on Human Rights and later by the UN General Assembly in Resolution 33/46 on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, 1978. Cf Reif (2004b), p. 95 where she describes the “road to the Paris Principles” in detail.
- 32.
UN General Assembly Resolution 48/134 on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, 1993.
- 33.
Cf Fundamental Rights Agency (2010) for more details.
- 34.
Cf Reif (2011), p. 290.
- 35.
UN General Assembly Resolution 48/134 on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, 1993, paragraph 2.
- 36.
Cf Oosting (2002), p. 9 et seqq.
- 37.
Cf Reif (2011), p. 291. The Geneva-based ICC has been established with the aim to coordinate the emerging NHRI network. It is incorporated as a legal entity under Swiss law, cf www.ohchr.org/en/countries/nhri/pages/nhrimain.aspx.
- 38.
The Asia Pacific Forum is an association of ICC-accredited NHRIs in the Asia Pacific region, cf www.asiapacificforum.net/ for details.
- 39.
UN General Assembly Resolution 63/169 on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other national human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights, 2008.
- 40.
UN General Assembly Resolution 63/169 on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights, 2008.
- 41.
UN General Assembly Resolution 63/172 on national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights, 2008.
- 42.
UN General Assembly Resolution 63/169 on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other national human rights institutions and protection of human rights, 2008.
- 43.
UN General Assembly Resolution 65/207 on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other national human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights, 2010.
- 44.
UN General Assembly Resolution 65/207 on the role of the Ombudsman, mediator and other human rights institutions in the promotion and protection of human rights, 2010.
- 45.
Cf UN General Assembly Resolution 65/207, 2010, preamble and UN General Assembly Resolution 63/169, 2008, preamble.
- 46.
Cf Chen (2010), p. 726.
- 47.
Cf Chen (2010), p. 728.
- 48.
- 49.
Cf Pearce (2000), p. 102.
- 50.
UNDP (2005), p. 111.
- 51.
Cf Wong and Yuen (2009), p. 123.
- 52.
Cf Wong and Yuen (2009), p. 123 for more details and definitions.
- 53.
Australasia and Pacific Ombudsman Region of the International Ombudsman Institute.
- 54.
Cf website of the IOI at www.theioi.org/.
- 55.
Cf website of the IOI at www.theioi.org/.
- 56.
Cf website of the IOI at http://www.theioi.org/.
- 57.
Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008). In this book, Kucsko-Stadlmayer, Professor of Law at the University of Vienna, compares 88 Ombudsperson Institutions from 46 European countries, including the European Union (European Ombudsman).
- 58.
Cf Sect. 1.2.4, p. 17.
- 59.
Adopted on 18 December 2002 by UN General Assembly Resolution 57/199.
- 60.
- 61.
Australia (eight Ombudsperson Institutions), China/Hong Kong, Cook Islands, Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Taiwan, Tonga and Vanuatu.
- 62.
In addition, there are Ombudsperson Institutions in the following countries in the region which are not IOI members: Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu. The Solomon Islands’ Ombudsperson is connected to the region’s IOI members via the Pacific Ombudsman Alliance, a regional organisation of Ombudsmen, cf www.pacificombudsman.org/.
- 63.
Cf www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14919067. According to Human Rights Watch, the present Ombudsperson was criticised for defending the 2006 coup d’état in her function as Chair of the Fiji Human Rights Commission. Some claim that she has been appointed as Ombudsperson in violation of the law, cf www.hrw.org/node/88450 for details.
- 64.
Cf Sect. 1.2.1, p. 10.
- 65.
- 66.
Cited in Caiden (1983), p. 44.
- 67.
Pillay N, a South-African jurist and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.
- 68.
Cf Pillay (2009), p. 2.
- 69.
Cf Ayeni (2009), p.4.
- 70.
Cf Ayeni (2009), p. 6.
- 71.
Cf Ayeni (2009) Ombudsmen as Human Rights Institutions: The New Face of a Global Expansion. Speech held at the 9th IOI World Conference in Stockholm, p. 6.
- 72.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 2 and pp. 7–11.
- 73.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 2.
- 74.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 2.
- 75.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 8 et seq.
- 76.
Cf Reif (2011), p. 273 et seq. for more details on Human Rights Commissions and Ombudsmen.
- 77.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 26.
- 78.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 26 et seqq. Reif overall differentiates ten variations, which also include hybrid public–private Ombudsmen, industrial Ombudsmen and Ombudsmen established within or by international organisations or at a supranational level.
- 79.
Cf Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008), p. 62.
- 80.
Cf Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008), p. 64.
- 81.
Cf Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008), p. 63 for a table of all powers described.
- 82.
Cf Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008), p. 64.
- 83.
Cf Sect. 4.1.3 , p. 74 and Sect. 4.1.4 , p. 79 for more details on the different powers.
- 84.
- 85.
Cf Reif (2004b), p. 12.
- 86.
However, this name is since long considered misleading and there is a proposal to rename the office to “Ombudsman of Tonga”, cf in detail the report on Tonga, Sect. 2.1.2.2, p. 276.
- 87.
This is the way chosen inter alia by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)/United States (US) (http://web.mit.edu/ombud/) and by the Stanford University/US (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/ombuds/). The term “Ombud” can also in the Swedish origin be used as a stand-alone term. Cf Sect. 1.1.1.
- 88.
Ombudsmen exist at the Yale University/US (http://medicine.yale.edu/ombuds/index.aspx) and the University of Bern/Switzerland (www.ombudsperson.unibe.ch/). In British Columbia/ Canada, the name of the office of the public sector Ombudsman was changed from Ombudsman to Ombudsperson by law in 2009, cf www.ombudsman.bc.ca/. In 2009, also the UN established an Office of the Ombudsperson by Security Council Resolution 1904 (to deal with requests to be removed from the UN Al-Qaida Sanctions List).
- 89.
Kucsko-Stadlmayer (2008).
References
Ayeni (2009) Ombudsmen as Human Rights Institutions: the new face of a global expansion. In: Speech held at the 9th IOI World Conference in Stockholm, p 4
Ayeni V, Hayden T, Reif LC (2000) Strengthening Ombudsman and Human Rights Institutions in Commonwealth Small and Island States. Commonwealth Secretariat, London
Buck T, Kirkham R, Thompson B (2011) The Ombudsman enterprise and administrative justice. Ashgate, Farnham
Caiden GE (ed) (1983) International handbook of the Ombudsman. Evolution and present function. Greenwood, Westport
Chen M (2010) New Zealand’s Ombudsmen legislation: the need for amendments after almost 50 years. Victoria Univ Wellington Law Rev 41:723–760
Fundamental Rights Agency (2010) National Human Rights Institutions in the EU Member States. Strengthening the fundamental rights architecture in the EU. European Union, Luxembourg
Giddings P, Sladecek V, Bueso LA (2000) The Ombudsman and human rights. In: Gregory R, Giddings P (eds) Righting wrongs. The Ombudsman in six continents. IOS, Berlin, pp 441–457
Gregory R, Giddings P (eds) (2000) Righting wrongs. The Ombudsman in six continents. IOS, Berlin
Hammarberg T (2009) Ombudsmen need independence to speak out for human rights. In: Speech held at the 9th IOI world conference in Stockholm
Jacoby D (1999) The future of the Ombudsman. In: Reif LC (ed) The International Ombudsman Anthology. Selected writings from the International Ombudsman Institute. Kluwer Law International, Dordrecht
Keith KJ (2005) Development of the role of the Ombudsman with reference to the Pacific. In: Speech held at the 22nd APOR conference, p 2
Koo JW, Ramirez FO (2009) National Incorporation of Global Human Rights: Worldwide Expansion of National Human Rights Institutions, 1966–2004. Soc Forces 87:1321–1354
Kucsko-Stadlmayer G (ed) (2008) European Ombudsman-Institutions. Springer, Vienna
Oosting M (2002) Protecting the Integrity and Independence of the Ombudsman Institution: the global perspective. In: Reif LC (ed) The international Ombudsman yearbook, vol 5. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden
Owen S (1999) The Ombudsman: essential elements and common challenges. In: Reif LC (ed) The international Ombudsman anthology: selected writings from the International Ombudsman Institute. Kluwer Law International, Dordrecht
Pearce D (2000) Ombudsman in Australia. In: Gregory R, Giddings P (eds) Righting wrongs. The Ombudsman in six continents. IOS, Berlin
Pillay N (2009) Current challenges to the protection and promotion of human rights. In: Speech held at the 9th IOI world conference in Stockholm
Reif LC (2004) The Ombudsman, good governance, and the International Human Rights System. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden
Reif LC (2011) Transplantation and adaptation: the evolution of the human rights Ombudsman. Boston Coll Third World Law J 31(2):269–310
Stern J (2008) Sweden. In: Kucsko-Stadlmayer G (ed) European Ombudsman-Institutions. Springer, Vienna
UNDP (2005) Programming for justice: access for all a practitioner’s guide to a human rights-based approach to access to justice. United Nations, Bangkok
Wong W, Yuen R (2009) The Ombudsman in Hong Kong: role and challenges under the transformation of governance in the post-1997 era. Asia Pac Law Rev 17(1):115–133
Yueh-chin H (1995) Role and responsibility of the control Yuan. In: Reif LC (ed) The Ombudsman concept. International Ombudsman Institute, Edmonton
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Frahm, M. (2013). Introduction. In: Australasia and Pacific Ombudsman Institutions. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33896-0_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33896-0_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33895-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33896-0
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)