- 14 - 14.
Investigation of complaints against the Municipal Councils
Commenting on the discussion at yesterday's (Thursday) Regional Council meeting attended by the Commissioner for Administrative Complaints (COMAC), Mr Andrew So, a spokesman for COMAC Office said that generalisation on what acts of the Council would be investigable by COMAC, and what would not, would neither be practicable nor possible.
He reiterated the point made by Mr So at the Regional Council meeting that COMAC would not, and could not, comment on hypothetical problems and situations.
The spokesman said what constituted "maladministration" was clearly defined in the COMAC Ordinance. It included, among other things, acts of unreasonable conduct, delay, discourtesy, lack of consideration and abuse of power.
The Ordinance did not define and distinguish the difference between "policy" and "administrative act". Instead, it gave COMAC wide discretion, under Section 9 of the Ordinance, to determine questions relating to COMAC's authority and whether to conduct an investigation.
COMAC would therefore approach problems from the point of view of whether they constituted "maladministration" as defined in the Ordinance, and not whether they are policy issues, or administrative acts, as claimed or seen by the organisation.
It would not be possible to distinguish where an administrative act ended, and where policy began.
This was the whole purpose of extending COMAC's jurisdiction to the the Regional Services Municipal Councils, in addition to their executive arms - Department and the Urban Services Department.
The spokesman said COMAC would be glad to work together with the Municipal Councils to draw up some guidelines for each other's reference.
He stressed that such would be no more than guidelines, and that COMAC must reserve his judgment, as required by the law, and determine each complaint on its individual merits.
End/Friday, January 20, 1995