Administrative Law for Ombudsman Enterprise -myassignmenthelp

Question: Discuss about theAdministrative Law for Ombudsman Enterprise and Justice. Answer: The level of powers and responsibilities which are vested in the administrative agencies of Australian governments are known as Australian administrative law. Basically it is a common law system where statutory overlays are increasing and the focus of which have been changed towards tribunals having extensive jurisdictions and a codified system of judicial review. A well developed ombudsman system is possessed by Australia along with legislations related to the freedom of legislations which are influenced by international models[1]. The comment and notice requirements of delegated legislation designing are influenced by the United States. An office of ombudsman exists both at state and commonwealth levels who have been provided with broad range of powers towards investigating actions related to administrative matters. Administrative law is brought in place so as to ensure quick and appropriate justice to the citizens. However it is against the concept of separation of powers which pr ovides that the judiciary, the executive and the legislative have different and independent roles to play in the society. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether ombudsman and administrative law at state level is appropriate to deal with the relationship between the state of Tasmania and the citizens in 2017. The role of an ombudsman is primarily investigative. It has to investigate the complaints made by the members of the public and in addition it has to investigate on own initiatives of the offices known as own motion investigation. Initially the investigation is privately conducted in an informal manner in form of preliminary inquiries. The powers of an ombudsman are similar to that of a royal commission which is to require examination and attendance of witness, administration of oaths, to enter premises and to require the production of documents[2]. In case it is believed by the ombudsman that an agency has not taken appropriate steps in relation to a particular matter reporting can be done by it to the state government. Tight budgetary restrictions have been imposed on the ombudsman recently. Many activities also have been removed by from the authority of ombudsman due to the introduction of privatization. In Tasmania ombudsman operates successfully and freely and act in public interest so as to improve the standard of public administration in Tasmania and resolve complaints. A few issues which are included by OT are related to the functioning of Tasmanian government agencies and departments, provisions related to services provided by local government, the welfare and treatment of people in prison and actions related to administration of the state owned businesses along with government business enterprises[3]. OT is an independent officer which is appointed by the governor who is directly answerable to the parliament. The OT investigates the administrative actions taken by public authorities so that it can be ensured that they are taking lawful, fair and reasonable actions. The OT works in objective, impartial and independent way in order to resolve complaints along with addressing systematic problems so as to enhance the standard and quality of Tasmanian public administration. The OT supervises over local councils,government departments, sewage and water corporations, stated owned companies, prisons and government enterprises. Investigation can be made by the OT on their own known as Own motionalong with a complaint made by the public. As provided by James ombudsman are very effective to enhance the relationship between the state and the citizens as it involves no cost, it is independent from the government, it provides a remedies for bad practices and when it comes to state ombudsman they have the power of offering conciliation services along with investigations[4]. However, according to buckombudsman cannot provide quick solutions to problems which are complex[5]. In addition as provided by Beckman ombudsman are not effective as the person making a complaint has no control over investigation as the ombudsman do not act specifically for the complainant and can even refuse to deal with particular matters[6]. In addition the decisions which are made by ombudsman are not binding decisions. The law which governs the decisions and actions of government decision makers is known as administrative law. Administrative actions, administrative decisions and administrative law are similar terms which can be used simultaneously. The area of Administrative law also covers the right of appealing against an administrative decision related to the question of Administrative review. Administrative law is predominant in the society. It affects building permits, car licensing, dog registration, water, sewerage, roads and mostly all sectors of society are covered by administrative law and therefore its functioning have a significant effect on the relationship between states and citizens. The decision of the local Council to impose a charge for sewerage or road works, the verdict of a government board towards acceptance rejection of an application related to the registration of a graduate as a teacher and the decision to revoke or grant car license are all parts of Administrative law. Administrative agencies work closely with the society as compared to the Legislature. The decision which is taken by administrative officials has to be in accordance to the existing laws. Although they have the power to make a decision their decisions cannot be influenced by corruption or personal preferences. The decisions of any administrative body is legally binding. However the citizens have the right to make an appeal against such decisions. Appeals are usually made to an Administrative Tribunal which has the capacity to review the merit of the decision. Further the decision of an Administrative Tribunal can be appealed against in court. In such circumstances the court does not have power to comment on the merit of the decision made by administrative tribunals the court only analyses whether such decisions have been made correctly in accordance to the laws or not. A person who has grievances against the decision made by administrative body can make a complaint to ombudsman of the particular state, administrative appeal to a tribunal, administrative review to a magistrate Court or Judicial review to the Supreme Court[7]. In Tasmania particularly citizens can appeal at Resource Management Planning and Appeal Tribunal and Tasmanian Public Housing Review Committee. It has to be noted that decisions which are provided by the public housing cannot be reviewed by the Supreme Court as they do not fall under the scope of Administrative decisions under the Judicial Review Act 2000. A person who is affected by the decision of the administrative body can make an appeal against the decision however in case the partner or ex-partner of such person is affected by such decisi on substantially can also make an appeal. There are a few legislations which provides that interested parties make an appeal against administrative bodies. For instance as provided by the Ombudsman Act 1978 where there is a question with respect to the jurisdiction of the ombudsman towards conducting an investigation into a complaint a party who is interested make an application before the supreme court to determine the question related to the jurisdiction[8]. Interested parties may include the administrative body, the principal officer of the administrative body, the Minister who is responsible for the decision and any person who has made the decision or the complaints[9]. The need for administrative law and Society is very high. It is not possible for the legislature to enact laws for each and every circumstances. The administrative bodies who deal closely with the society understand the functioning of the society and are in a much better position than the Legislature to handle the specific situation. However for a person to make a review against in administrative bodys decision there must be appropriate grounds for making such appeals[10]. Speaking technically judicial functions are primarily vested in the courts. The Commonwealth constitution does not follow the doctrine of separation of powers as quickly as it is followed by other countries. In Australia judicial powers are vested in both Federal and state courts however it is not compulsory that only these courts have the power to exercise judicial functions. In Australia judicial powers are delegated to other bodies which do not fall within the scope of ordinary courts. Administrative bodies can be better than ordinary quotes with respect to disposing cases in a timely way. In addition adjudication of Administrative tribunals are much cheaper as compared to court adjudication. The system of Administrative Agencies is flexible as well as informal as compared to the stringent and rigid common court proceedings. Administrative bodies or agencies usually have experts who have increased knowledge in a particular field or domain and therefore they are in a better positio n to understand a particular matter as compared to the judges in the court only have legal knowledge. However as provided by Barnett administrative bodies suffer from a lack of legal expertise many members of the administrative agencies are selected from diverse backgrounds and thus they do not have any legal knowledge required to adjudicate disputes[11]. Moreover Rose et al. have provided that there is always a fear of partiality with respect to the decision of Administrative agencies as most of the members of Administrative tribunals add employees of various Agencies all offices and therefore there decisions may not be particularly free and they may be bias or partial towards a particular agency[12]. The most debate full criticism provided against the system of Administrative law is that it violates the doctrine of separation of powers as it is the quotes who have been provided the authority to deal with legal matters. Ombudsman is an initiative which would ensure that there is a body to supervise over the decisions of Administrative bodies. In addition as a moment can carry out investigation in relation to and administrative party without any complain there is always a fear in mind of the administrative officials that a Watchdog is keeping an eye on the activities and therefore they must act in accordance with law. For the purpose of promoting a healthy relationship between the citizens and the state the proper functioning of the administrative bodies has to be insured. Just and fair decisions provided by the administrative bodies would ensure that the faith of people is entrusted into the governance of the state. Ombudsman is an efficient tool despite all criticism to ensure proper functioning of the administrative bodies. This can be said because even though the decisions of ombudsman and not binding the Parliament can take necessary action against administrative bodies if proper proof is provid ed to it by the ombudsman. Even though ombudsman do not investigate into specific matters the investigation can also be initiated by them on their own therefore they are able to keep an eye on the functions of the administrative bodies. Although ombudsman is a modest tool which does not have access to much power it has significant influence on ensuring good administration, safeguarding human rights, preventing corruption and initiating positive policy making. The most user friendly public administration is brought into effect by the use of ombudsman as provided by Leyland[13]. Through the process of Investigation and reviews ombudsman stop the violation of human rights and ensures consequences for any violation. Through adding to the process of changing and formulating policies ombudsman makes a contribution towards removing any inefficiencies and deficiencies related to the function of the state along with removal of any potential causes of social conflict. It not only strengthens democracy but also modernizes state institution. However it is not easy to measure how effective the work of an ombudsman is as the role played by him in the society constitutes of many functions such as dealing with complaint, interventions, identification and removal of irregularities, supervising the function of the state bodies and recommending a course of action to enhance the functions of the state. The concept of ombudsman and the principles of Administrative law must work hand in hand in order to ensure that a healthy relationship is established between the citizens and the state in the modern day. As administrative law is present in almost every part of the society there may be situation giving rise to personal preferences and corruption taking over the duty to act in accordance to the legal provisions. Such situations are addressed by an ombudsman so as to trigger best quality pubic administration and healthy citizen and state relationships. Bibliography Barnett, Hilaire.Constitutional and administrative law. Taylor Francis, 2017. Beckman, Ludvig, and Fredrik Uggla. "An Ombudsman for Future Generations, Legitimate and Effective?." (2016): 117-134. Buck, Trevor, and Richard Kirkham.The ombudsman enterprise and administrative justice. Routledge, 2016. G Fleming, Civil Administration Review Issues in Practice (2003 conference paper) Leyland, Peter, and Gordon Anthony.Textbook on administrative law. Oxford University Press, 2016 R McLead, 25 Years of the Cth ombudsman (2002 Conference Presentation) R Snell and E Wells, Serial Applicants Troublesome Users and Abusers or Necessary Agitators (2006) AIAL Forum Paper. R snell, Review of Ombudsman Act: Position Paper (2004) Rose-Ackerman, Susan, Peter L. Lindseth, and Blake Emerson, eds.Comparative administrative law. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017.