An empirical study on the systemic investigations function of the commonwealth ombudsman from 1977-2005

Abstract

This thesis evaluates the systemic investigations role of the Commonwealth Ombudsman and explores the relationship between its dual roles of system-fixer and individual complaint­-handler. This research is unique as to date no other empirical research has explored the interaction between the dual roles of the Commonwealth Ombudsman. The outcomes of this study provide insight into the operation of the Ombudsman institution as an instrument of democratic accountability and allow for assessment of the operation and effectiveness of the Commonwealth Ombudsman in terms of the citizen, government agencies and the wider legal system. Specifically, this empirical study uses a quantitative approach to test the following two hypotheses about the operation of the Commonwealth Ombudsman: 1. that the Commonweald1 Ombudsman is increasingly using its systemic investigatory function; and 2. that the systemic investigations role is linked to that of individual complaint handling. To address the hypotheses, four subordinate research aims were formulated: 1. To create two longitudinal data sets: one for a select portion of the systemics role of the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the other for the individual complaint handling role. 2. To develop a methodology to facilitate comparative evaluation of the systemic investigations role (formal reports and own motion investigations) and the individual complaint handling role. 3. To conduct a systematic, quantitative analysis of systemic investigations (formal reports and own motion investigations) of the Commonwealth Ombudsman across identified legislative powers from 1978-2005. 4. To undertake data analysis to examine how systemic investigations (formal reports and own motion investigations) relate to the role of the Commonwealth Ombudsman as an individual complaint-handler. Broadly, in relation to the first hypothesis die study finds that the Commonwealth Ombudsman is increasing its use of systemic investigations/powers. In relation to the second hypothesis, the study reveals a symbiotic relationship between the individual complaint handling role and the function of systemic investigation. This research makes a substantial contribution to new knowledge ill four ways. First, it develops a methodology for measuring an administrative law institution. Secondly, it creates two unique quantitative data sets for analysis of the performance of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, one for a definable portion of its system-fixing role and the other for individual complaints. Thirdly, it uses longitudinal comparisons and applies the data over a 28-year period (from 1977, when the Commonwealth Ombudsman was introduced, to 2005) to evaluate the operation and effectiveness of the systemic investigations role and its relationship to individual complaint handling. Finally, it provides both analysis and evaluation of the data results. The data confirms that the role of the Commonwealth Ombudsman is changing, moving from a reactive complaint-handler to increasing its focus upon being a proactive system-fixer. The study identifies opportunities for improving this transition both within the office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman and for policymakers more generally. It also provides suggestions for ensuring that the core values of the Ombudsman institution are not compromised, so that it can provide the maximum ongoing benefit to the system of government administration and to the individual citizen. Given the genesis of the Australian Ombudsman concept from the Swedish 'grundnorm', it is fitting that the methodology developed in this thesis has both national and international application. This study is the first empirical attempt to evaluate longitudinally a mature Ombudsman institution using quantitative methodology. Its measures of impact and performance will be particularly relevant to the Ombudsman institution and to complaint handling bodies more generally.