Page 337 of 382
652
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Government service is still characteristic of community life in Hong Kong today. I have heard it said on many an occasion that to get things done here one must pay his way through.
To remedy the apparent arbitrariness of the all-powerful Civil Servant and to reduce the frustrations of the ordinary citizen there is a need for the appointment of an Ombudsman in Hong Kong who will have access to government records and the right to thoroughly investigate and report to the proper authorities on any case taken up.
The idea of an Ombudsman first originated in Denmark and has since spread to other Scandinavian countries and New Zealand. This system has proved so successful in these countries that Britain is expected to have its own Ombudsman system which will be required to take up any case referred to it by a Member of Parliament. Because of our present structure of Government, the alternative routes for those seeking redress for their unfair treatment by officialdom are very restricted and the need here for an Ombudsman system is manifestly greater than in Britain.
The Ombudsman is essentially an intermediary between the people and the Government. He investigates, arbitrates, and gives his findings. He is usually a high Court judge or a man with legal training and commanding public confidence and completely independent of the government administration. He has no power to revoke the decisions of authorities, nor to force an authority to take measures in any other way. The influence which may be exercised by him is entirely dependent upon the weight of the reasons invoked by him in support of his findings. But in countries where this practice has been adopted, practically in all cases his findings and recommendations have been carefully followed and implemented.
Furthermore, it has been the experience in Scandinavian countries that the practice of the Ombudsman to put before the public through the medium of the press the results of his findings has acted as a strong deterrent against serious abuse of administrative powers.
The principle of an Ombudsman has been traditional in Chinese history from ancient times, when emperors usually sent commissioners to various parts of the empire to listen to complaints and to reopen and to reinvestigate cases where there might have been a miscarriage of justice. Indeed, the idea has been so deeply implanted among Chinese that when the Nationalist Government was set up after the overthrow of the Manchu dynasty, the Control or Supervisory Yuan became one of the five main constituents in the government structure. The idea of the need for such a system still prevails even today among Chinese. For instance, many Kaifong and clansmen associations, trade and welfare organizations still retain a supervisory committee consisting of comparatively elderly members who have in the past served in various capacities in the same organization but who are no longer in active service. It is not surprising, therefore, that the proposal for an Ombudsman system for Hong Kong has met with universal support both from the Chinese and the English language press.
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
653
His function is concerned not so much with investigating general policies, which in Hong Kong is the function of the various Councils and Government committees, as with providing a safeguard against abuse or mis-use of authority usually in specific cases. His work takes the form of a two-way traffic. He is required to investigate and report only on the true facts and, in appropriate cases, to clarify the position of and vindicate any action or decision taken by a Civil Servant.
There have been various suggestions as to the form the Ombudsman system in Hong Kong might take. The editor of the Sunday Examiner insisted that "given the constitutional situation of Hong Kong, the Ombudsman be appointed by the Parliament at Westminster and be responsible to it and to it alone." An Editor of the South China Morning Post favoured the appointment of "some outstanding bilingual lawyer who enjoyed the respect of government and the community." My friend Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN has, through the press, suggested the creation of an Ombudsman Committee consisting of unofficial representatives from the Executive, Legislative, and Urban Councils, with the Executive Council representatives as the Chairman of the Committee. He further suggested that the staff be headed by an executive secretary with legal training.
I would say that the mere creation of such an office by itself, whether it be a one-man Ombudsman or an Ombudsman Committee, will go a long way in bringing about the desired results. Its impact will go far beyond the physical limits of the work that the Ombudsman is capable of doing. Human failings are such that so long as they know there is someone over-looking their shoulders, they would be on their toes and would maintain a high degree of efficiency. Government officers who still regard inquiries by Councillors as interference will be sure to change their attitude overnight and will be only too ready and willing to give a full and careful explanation of the reasons behind decisions to avoid inquiry and investigation by the Ombudsman.
As a start, I would suggest that the Ombudsman confines his investigation to complaints referred to him by either the Executive, the Legislative, or the Urban Council, to which the findings should in the first instance be given. This will enable Umelco and the Ward System of the Urban Council to continue their very useful work of keeping in close touch with the public. The service of the
Page 337 of 382
382
382
Page 337 of 382
Page 337 of 382
652
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
Government service is still characteristic of community life in Hong Kong today. I have heard it said on many an occasion that to get things done here one must pay his way through.
To remedy the apparent arbitrariness of the all-powerful Civil Servant and to reduce the frustrations of the ordinary citizen there is a need for the appointment of an Ombudsman in Hong Kong who will have access to government records and the right to thoroughly investigate and report to the proper authorities on any case taken up.
The idea of an Ombudsman first originated in Denmark and has since spread to other Scandinavian countries and New Zealand. This system has proved so successful in these countries that Britain is expected to have its own Ombudsman system which will be required to take up any case referred to it by a Member of Parliament. Because of our present structure of Government, the alternative routes for those seeking redress for their unfair treatment by officialdom are very restricted and the need here for an Ombudsman system is manifestly greater than in Britain.
The Ombudsman is essentially an intermediary between the people and the Government. He investigates arbitrates and gives his findings. He is usually a high Court judge or a man with legal training and commanding public confidence and completely independent of the government administration. He has no power to revoke the decisions of authorities, nor to force an authority to take measures in any other way. The influence which may be exercise by him is entirely dependent upon the weight of the reasons invoked by him in support of his findings. But in countries where this practice has been adopted practically in all cases his findings and recommendations have been carefully followed and implemented.
Furthermore, it has been the experience in Scandinavian countries that the practice of the Ombudsman to put before the public through the medium of the press the results of his findings has acted as a strong deterrent against serious abuse of administrative powers.
The principle of an Ombudsman has been traditional in Chinese history from ancient times, when emperors usually sent commissioners to various parts of the empire to listen to complaints and to reopen and to reinvestigate cases where there might have been a miscarriage of justice. Indeed the idea has been so deeply implanted among Chinese that when the Nationalist Government was set up after the overthrow of the Manchu dynasty, the Control or Supervisory Yuan became one of the five main constituents in the government structure. The idea of the need for such a system still prevails even today among Chinese. For instance many Kaifong and clansmen associations, trade and welfare organizations still retain a supervisory committee consisting of com-
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
653
paratively elderly members who have in the past served in various capacities in the same organization but who are no longer in active service. It is not surprising therefore that the proposal for an Ombudsman system for Hong Kong has met with universal support both from the Chinese and the English language press.
The function of an Ombudsman is concerned not so much with investigating general policies which in Hong Kong is the function of the various Councils and Government committees as with providing a safeguard against abuse or mis-use of authority usually in specific cases. His work takes the form of a two-way traffic. He is required to investigate and report only on the true facts and in appropriate cases to clarify the position of and vindicate any action or decision taken by a Civil Servant.
There have been various suggestions as to the form the Ombudsman system in Hong Kong might take. The editor of the Sunday Examiner insisted that "given the constitutional situation of Hong Kong the Ombudsman be appointed by the Parliament at Westminster and be responsible to it and to it alone." An Editor of the South China Morning Post favoured the appointment of "some outstanding biligual lawyer who enjoyed the respect of government and the community." My friend Mr. Hilton CHEONG-LEEN has through the press suggested the creation of an Ombudsman Committee consist- ing of unofficial representatives from the Executive, Legislative and Urban Councils with the Executive Council representatives as the Chairman of the Committee. He further suggested that the staff be headed by an executive secretary with legal training.
I would say that the mere creation of such an office by itself, whether it be a one-man ombudsman or an Ombudsman Committee, will go a long way in bringing about the desired results. Its impact will go far beyond the physical limits of the work that the Ombudsman is capable of doing. Human failings are such that so long as they know there is someone over-looking their shoulders they would be on Those their toes and would maintain a high degree of efficiency. Government officers who still regard inquiries by Councillors as inter- ference will be sure to change their attitude over-night and will be only too ready and willing to give a full and careful explanation of the reasons behind decisions to avoid inquiry and investigation by the Ombudsman.
As a start I would suggest that the Ombudsman confines his investigation to complaints referred to him by either the Executive, the Legislative or the Urban Council to which the findings should in the first instance be given. This will enable the Umelco and the Ward System of the Urban Council to continue their very useful work of keeping in close touch with the public. The service of the
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.