The Office of Ombudsman in New Zealand
| Author | Guy Powles |
| Published date | 01 January 1968 |
| Date | 01 January 1968 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/j.1099-162X.1968.tb00317.x |
The
Office of Ombudsman
in
New
Zealand
by
Sir
GUY
POWLES
Sir Guy
Powles
is the
New
Zealand
Ombudsman
THENew Zealand Parliamentary Commissioner for Investigations, otherwise
known as the Ombudsman, is a native product. While undoubtedly a
member of the genus Ombudsman, and while bearing its Scandinavian name,
the New Zealand Ombudsman is not an exotic transplant from Scandinavia
but is a distinct and native species - this is not however to discount the
immense value of the Scandinavian (particularly the Danish) experience from
which New Zealand has profited.
New Zealand has a population of just over 2.6 million and has a land area
slightly greater than that of the United Kingdom and the constitutional
institutions are British derived. New Zealand is a parliamentary democracy,
with legislature having untrammelled sovereign powers, on the British model.
The
legislature is, however, unicameral. New Zealand governments have,
in recent times, shown clear evidence of a desire to make democracy work and
have not hesitated to experiment with new institutions.
The
institution of Parliamentary Commissioner for Investigations, or
Ombudsman, in New Zealand is very largely a natural growth - an attempt by
the community to provide itself with another instrument of control in order
to fill some of the gaps which become glaringly wide in modern circumstances.
It
may be regarded as a definite attempt by the legislature to penetrate at
certain specific points the shield which protects a large area of legislative and
executive discretion from proper scrutiny.
The
statute setting up the
Office
of
Ombudsman in New Zealand and
empowering his activities is the Parliamentary Commissioner (Ombudsman)
Act, 1962.
The
main operative section prescribes that the principal function
of
the Commissioner is to investigate any decision or recommendation made
(including any recommendation made to a Minister
of
the Crown) or any
act done or omitted, relating to a matter of administration, and affecting any
person or body of persons in his or its personal capacity, in or by any of the
departments or organizations named in the schedule to the Act, or by any,
officer, employee, or member thereofin the exercise of any power or function
conferred on him by any enactment.
The
departments or organizations
named in the schedule to the Act are practically all the government admini-
strative departments and agencies, but special statutory corporations which
are not truly part of the State Administration are omitted. For example, the
New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation and the National Airways Corpora-
tion are outside the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman. It will be seen that the
jurisdiction extends to matters relating to administration, with the conse-
quence that matters concerningpolicy only wouldbe excluded.
The
notorious
difficulty of distinguishing between a matter of policy and a matter of
To continue reading
Request your trial