The role of ombudsman in protection of human rights in UK and how to apply it in Saudi Arabia

Introduction

The office of ombudsman was founded in the Parliamentary Act in 1967 as a new kind of public official whose responsibility was to investigate citizens’ complaints about the cases of government officials’ maladministration. Statutory powers were given to the statutory office holder in order to access information, to require witness’ attendance and outright privilege to put forward protection for his reports. The maladministration included any bias, inattention, neglect, incompetence, delay, ineptitude, arbitrariness, perversity and so on. Initially, the concept of ombudsman was meat with a lot of criticism being viewed as a constitution innovation incapable of ensuring government accountability. The office however has continued to date and to continue to carry out investigations on maladministration cases in U.K (Ayeni, 2009). In this paper we look at the role played by the ombudsman to ensure the rights of the citizens are not violated. The study also looks at how the ombudsman model can be applied in Saudi Arabia, a country that has no such office put in place by the law of the land.

Literature review

The role of the current ombudsman office has evolved into a human right function which is linked into the primary character of the statutory office. This role can be confirmed right from where the meaning of the term ombudsman is derived to mean a trusted individual whose role is to prevent violation of human rights, authority’s abuse of powers, unfair decisions, negligence and maladministration so as to enhance public administration and to make the actions of the government open. (Ayeni, 2009) The individual is also tasked with the role of ensuring that government’s servants become more accountable to the public members. Thus the ombudsman does not undertake the work of human rights as an additional function but as a very important for its basic existence. He in short an independent, unbiased officer or a committee of officers put in place by the constitution to supervise the administration. Usually, his responsibility is to deal with the complaints raised by the public on injustices, human rights and matters that relate to corruption. The constitution gives him the power to carry out investigations, report and provide recommendations about cases concerning an individual, the procedures used by the administration and changes that are necessary for the systems. The ombudsman does not charge for the services provided to the public and can readily be accessed by the citizens (The Law Society, 2016). This is necessary for all the public members to lodge a complaint concerning the violation of their rights without any hindrances.

The human lives are affected by the ombudsman since the aim is to ensure that the principles of justice or fairness are promoted across all the facets of the society. In protecting human rights, the office basic function include guarding the rights of a person while they are dealing with the people trusted to implement public power. The office also comes up with recommendations on the right redress in case it has been found that the rights have been violated. In order to ensure these roles are performed appropriately, the office provides assistance to the parliament in order to exercise control over the executive arm the government so that it can engage in impartial, and proper administration. The aspects that relates to human rights entitlement include the person’s gender, sexuality, race, nationality or other features that defines human beings. The entitlements involves access to various things like fair trial, food, shelter and absence of others like arbitrary detention and inhumane torture. It is the function of the ombudsman to ensure human dignity is maintained through respect for an individual’s rights (Steinerte & Murray 2009).

In the case of Saudi Arabia, its history has experienced emergence of various kinds of civil society organisations with an aim of ensuring human rights are respected. Their efforts, however, have been hindered by the institutions of the modern state. The Kingdom’s constitution has no provisions to particularly support to freedom of assembly or association (ICNL, 2013).  According to a 2014 Human Rights Watch report on Saudi Arabia, the country continued with trying, convicting and putting into prison the political nonconformists and activists calling for human rights observation on the basis of their peaceful activities. There has also been cases of human rights lawyers being detained and later being convicted on unclear charges due to their peaceful activism (Human Rights Watch, 2015). In absence of human rights groups and a constitution that does not provide for various basic rights like freedom of association, there need to be a system or model that can fill this void. There is a need for a change in the constitution to allow the inclusion of statutory ombudsman office that will make the government institutions especially the executive arm are accountable for their actions or  lack thereof. This should be done in consideration that the very organs of the government that is normally mandated with ensuring that human rights are not violated, which are the courts and appeals tribunal continue to hinder the crusaders of human rights. Also the officials always refuse to have human rights and political groups registered a situation that leaves members prone to prosecution for what is claimed to be unregistered organizations. Also Saudi Arabia does not allow public by people of religions apart from Islam which systematically leads to discrimination against minority groups of Muslim religion which include Ismaili and Twelve Shia (Human Rights Watch, 2015). The presence of an ombudsman office would ensure that the human rights organisations and political groups are registered and the prosecution of officials who have neglected to register the groups. The office would also receive complaints from minority groups on how their freedom of worship and association are violated. There are numerous cases of detainees, who include children, encountering violation of their rights of fair trial and due process. There also cases of arbitrary arrest, ill treatment and torture in the detention areas (Human Rights Watch, 2015). These are the kind of the inhumane actions that an ombudsman office would be mandated to deal with.

In conclusion, it is important for Saudi Arabia’s constitution to be amended and a statutory office of ombudsman to be provided for. The office holder should be given autonomous authority so as champion for the upholding of basic human rights and give guidance to government institutions on their responsibility in ensuring that they perform their duties while maintaining human dignity. This is necessary especially in era where laws are being revised to cater for new challenges such as terrorism. The ombudsman will ensure that changes will not result to human rights violation on pretence of fighting emerging issues.

 

References

 Ayeni, V. (2009).Ombudsmen as Human Rights Institutions: The New Face of a Global Expansion. London.2-26

Human Rights Watch (2015).World Report: Saudi Arabia Events of 2014. Retrieved from: https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2015/country-chapters/saudi-arabia

ICNL (2013).NGO Law Monitor: Saudi Arabia. Retrieved from: http://www.icnl.org/research/monitor/saudiarabia.html

Steinerte, E., Murray, R. (2009).Same but Different? National human rights commissions and ombudsman institutions as national preventive mechanisms under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture. 1-9. Retrieved from: https://www.hrc.co.nz/files/7214/2550/8359/Steinerte__Murray_year_-_National_human_rights_commissions_and_ombudsman_institutions_as_NPMs_under_OPCAT.pdf

The Law Society (2016).The role of the Legal Ombudsman. Retrieved from: http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/support-services/risk-compliance/regulation/legal-ombudsman/