1.

INTRODUCTION

The Ombudsman can bring the lamp of scrutiny to otherwise dark places even over the
resistance of those who would draw the blinds.
Judicial review is not the only option available to a person adversely affected by action of a
statutory tribunal or government officials. The Ombudsman is an independent institution
with power to examine governmental abuses affecting the members of the public. The
office of Ombudsman is originally meant Representative of the public and at the same
time, it operates as a watchdog looking at the work of administrative law.
Until the Second World War, individuals were reas12onably content with the machinery of
resolving disputes. It was simply no longer possible to say that every person adversely
affected in an unfair manner by action of a governmental official, would have the resources
or competence to engage a prosecutor to take action. Court procedures generally could be
both lengthy and expensive. The rights of an individual such as to consult their individual
Parliamentary representative, to organise a petition or could all be considered reasonably
difficult to undertake.
The Ombudsman is a statutory creation because the legislature has purposely limited the
powers of the office of Ombudsman and not given wide discretionary powers though it is
impartial and services are free and available to all. Investigations conducted by the
Ombudsman do not interfere with the normal process of government administration,
because the office operates informally. No public activity lies outside the scope of the
Ombudsman. In some countries, the office of Ombudsman more formally referred to the
Ombudsman as the 'Parliamentary Commissioner' (Eg New Zealand referred as the
Parliamentary Commissioner and the United Kingdom still refers as Parliamentary
Commissioner for Administration).

2. HISTORY
An ombudsman is a person who acts as a trusted intermediary between either the state,
elements of state or an organization, and some internal or external constituency, while
representing not only but mostly the broad scope of constituent interests. Ombudsman is
etymologically

rooted

in

the Old

Norse word umbosmar,

essentially

meaning

representative. In its most frequent modern usage, an ombudsman is an official, usually

appointed by the government or by parliament but with a significant degree of
independence, who is charged with representing the interests of the public by investigating
and addressing complaints reported by individuals.
Whether appointed by the legislature, the executive, or an organization, the typical duties of
an ombudsman are to investigate constituent complaints and attempt to resolve them,
usually through recommendations or mediation. Ombudsmen sometimes also aim to
identify systemic issues leading to poor service or breaches of peoples rights. At the
national level, most ombudsmen have a wide mandate to deal with the entire public sector,
and sometimes also elements of the private sector such as contracted service providers. In
some cases, there is a more restricted mandate, for example with particular sectors of
society. More recent developments have included the creation of specialised Childrens
Ombudsman and Information Commissioner agencies.
The figure of Ombudsman, with its current characteristics, owes its origin from Sweden,
however, its traces may be found in ancient history. In this regards, Dr. Pickle, Director
General of the Austrian Ombudsmans Office has made the following observation in his
renowned paper1: Institution to investigate complaints can only be seen in the context of public
administration; hence their history is also the history of public administration as a whole. It
goes back to the Koran. In the Koran itself the term administration is not used, but in
many of its verses the principles of political and administrative system are expounded.
Justice is one of the basic principles of Islamic Ideology.
Before the times of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) there was no administration in the proper
sense of the word. It was the Prophet who first introduced administrative authorities. He
appointed governors of the provinces, judges and tax collectors. They were all accountable
to the Prophet. We have no report of complaints about these institutions. As essential
1 The Ombudsman and Administrative Reforms by Dr. Pickl.
2

principles of government and administration, the Prophet bequeathed trust, justice and
effectiveness as well the combination of authority with responsibility.
It was Omer, Second Caliph of Islam, who created the Institution of Mohtasib. 2 He enjoyed
complete independence and functioned within the framework of an institution called
hisbah. Its role was to ensure the observance of religious principles in daily life. In Egypt
this institution existed up to the middle of the 19th century. An interesting fact in this
context is that the institution of hisbah and its functions was also adopted by the
Cursaders in Jerusalem; they even used the even used the Arab world Mohtasib although
they changed it into Mathessep3.
Hazrat Ali, forth Caliph of Islam, in his famous epistle to Malik Ashtar, the Governor of
Egypt, stressed the very fact in the following manner: Out of your hours of work fix a time for complaints and for those who want to approach
you with their grievances. For this purpose you must arrange public audience for them, and
during this audience, for the sake of God, treat them with kindness, courtesy and respect.
Do not let your army and police be in the audience hall at such a time so that those who
have grievances against your government may speak to you freely, unreservedly and
without fear. All this is a necessary factor for your rule because I have often heard the
Prophet (Peace of God be upon him) saying: that nation or government cannot achieve
salvation where the rights of the depressed, destitute and suppressed are not guarded, and
where mighty and powerful persons are not forced to accede to these rights.4
During the Abbasids era (750-847), complaint handling agencies called Diwan-alMazalim5 were established. Its function was to examine complaints brought by the public
against government officials. The institution was headed by a senior judge responsible for
examining the grievances.
The genesis of the institution may also be found in Sparta and Athens, where the office of
the Eflore and the Euthynoi, respectively controlled the activities performed by the
2 Mohtasib means a person, who conducts accountability. Its function was to be a guardian of public morals
in many fields of life, especially in the towns and above all in the market place. He was the market supervisor,
the Sahib as-sup, as well as the settler of disputes.
3 Quoted from WafaqiMohtasib (Ombudsman)s Annual Report 1990 p.6-7
4 Mohtasib (Ombudsman)s Annual Report. Almost all the reports have quoted this important excerpt of the
letter. Also see NehjulBalagha, a collection of the speeches and writings of Hazarat Ali (AS)
5 Diwan means an office, secretariat or an official agency.

officials of government and municipal actions. The Romans installed an officer called the
tribune to protect the interests and rights of the plebeians from the patricians. In China,
during the Yu and Sun dynasty, an officer called Yuan was appointed to report the voice of
the people to the Emperor and to announce the Emperors decrees to the people. 6 The
Persian Empire, King Cyrus charged the O Olho de Rei with the duty to supervise the
activity of all his officials. During the XV century, the Council of the Ten, in Venice, had
the mandate to control the bureaucratic excesses committed in the city.
During his exile in Turkey, the King of Sweden, Charles XII, observed the working of
Dewan-i-Mazalim. On restoration, the King ordered to establish a similar institution in
Sweden7. In Sweden the office was institutionalized in 1809 with the title of
Justitieombudsman. According to Ibrahim al-Wahab8 of course one could not draw definite
conclusion regarding the origin of any institution anywhere . But being aware of the
history of complaint handling in the Islamic law system and the fact that during the time of
King Charles XII in Turkey this system was existing, the influence seems to be evident.
Ombudsman9 is an old Swedish word that has been used for centuries to describe a person
who represents or protects the interests of another. The word was originally derived from
medieval Germanic tribes where the term was applied to a third party whose task was to
collect fines from remorseful culprit families and give them to the aggrieved families of
victims (Kircheiner, 1983). The part word, man is taken directly from Swedish (the old
Norse word was umbodhsmadr) and does not necessarily mean that the holder be of the
male gender. At present, there are several women, who are part of ombudsman community
worldwide.10
In Sweden, the ombudsman office was established by the Parliament to assist it in its
dealings with the Executive and the Judiciary. Apparently, it may be considered that the
Riksdag (Swedish Parliament) felt inability to satisfactorily exercise its oversight on the
activities of other branches of government. In order to carry out its role as representative of
the people, the Swedish Parliament felt that it needed an officer who could actively deal
6 Satyanand, Anand, Growth of the Ombudsman Concept, Journal of South Pacific Law, article 1 of Volume
3, 1999, School of Law, University of south Pacific.
7 WafaqiMohtasib Annual Report 1998.
8 WafaqiMohtasib Annual Report 1990.
9 An Ombudsman Overview, David Peppiatt, Project Researcher, Briefing Paper for The Ombudsman Project
Inter-agency Steering Group Meeting on November 21, 1997 at British Red Cross.
10 Satyanand, Anand Judge, Ibid.

with complaints made by the public about action being taken by Executive and the
Judiciary. In addition, the following key elements of the Swedish form of government also
led to the establishment of ombudsman office: i.

There is no concept of Ministerial responsibility such as exists in Parliaments based

on the Westminster system, where the minister is chosen from the members of the

ii.

Parliament.
In Sweden the Judiciary is a career service that is modeled much more closely on a
traditional executive style of decision maker and which therefore lends itself to some
of the pressures that exist in any career and promotion based bureaucracy.

3. NEED FOR OMBUDSMAN

(a) Judicial control is not effective as the judiciary cannot go into the merits of any
decision given by the administration. It can merely quash an administrative decision on
the grounds that it is not in accordance with the law such as ultra vires, malafides,
irrelevant considerations, patent error in the law, etc.
(b) It is very difficult to prove the abovementioned grounds and the courts generally do
not prefer asking administrative authorities to produce reports and files. Thus, the
entire burden lies on the individual challenging the order to prove his case.
(c) The legislature generally does not lay down standards which are to be followed by
the administration while framing rules, orders, etc. It might so happen that something
in a statute may be permissive for the administration to do but not mandatory. The
administration cannot be questioned in this case even if it does not do such thing in
public interest as the same is not mandatory.
(d) Also, in writ petitions which is the most common way of challenging an
administrative action, courts rely primarily on affidavits filed by the parties rather than
oral testimony and cross examination. Such affidavits generally seek to conceal more
than they reveal.
(e) The administration cannot also be compelled to give reasons for decisions taken by
it beyond the principles of natural justice.
5

(f) Further, judicial procedure is very time consuming and expensive. It regards the
engaging of counsels as well which many people cannot afford.
(g) Also, technically the legislature being a representative of the people should exercise
a check on the administration. But, this is not possible owing to a multi-party system
and party politics because of which now it is the executive which exercises power over
the legislature.
(h) The legislature is always overburdened and focuses more on legislation and
formulation of policies rather than exercising a check on the administration.

4. STATUS OF OMBUDSMAN
The original Swedish concept of ombudsman has proved remarkably flexible and
adaptable. It has been constantly adapted and modified to suit a wide variety of sectors and
organizations. There are public sector ombudsmen, created by statute, and private sector
ombudsmen, created as voluntary schemes, legislative ombudsmen and executive
ombudsmen, all-purpose ombudsmen and specialized ombudsmen. Some ombudsmen can
investigate on their own initiative while others can only respond to complaints. Apart from
classical ombudsmen, several ombudsmen like institutions exist in private sector. In North
America, there are about 100 ombudsman offices in colleges and universities, an estimated
200 in corporations. Three dozen newspapers have an ombudsman. Nearly 4,000 hospitals
have patient ombudsman offices and a great many businesses have client or consumer
complaint offices. Each state has a nursing home/long-term cafe ombudsman structure, and
there appear to be about 1,500 part-time and full-time ombudsmen attached to those offices.
The vast majority of ombudsmen operate only within a national jurisdiction. European
Community Ombudsman, created under the Maastricht Treaty in 1995, enjoys the unique
status of being one of the supranational ombudsmen in existence. The European
Ombudsman is responsible for investigating complaints of maladministration in the
activities of Community institutions or bodies. The World Banks Inspection Panel
provides another example of an international ombudsman-style system. The Inspection
Panel was created in 1993 to provide an independent forum for private citizens who believe
6

that they or their interests have been or could be adversely affected by a project financed by
the World Bank and to investigate any failures by the Bank to follow its policies and
procedures.

5. CHARACTERISTICS OF OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTION

Expert watchers of the functioning of Ombudsman-type institutions the world over have
identified four pillars which enable such an institution to stand erect and function
effectively. These pillars are independence, impartiality and fairness of procedure,
credible review process and confidentiality.11
Independenceof theOmbudsman is essential for inspiring peopleto make complaints
against public authorities. This is ensured by the enactment itself. The Ombudsman is
independent from the influence of the departments and public authorities which fall within
his or her jurisdiction. The best selection processes avoid political appointments. The
constituting law must provide for a fixed and reasonably long term of office, allow for
removal only by a special process that is insulated from undue political influence, ensure a
fixed, high salary, provide an adequate budget to support the administrative expenses of the
office of the Ombudsman, give the Ombudsman sole power to appoint and remove staff,
grant immunity from liability for criminal prosecution for actions under the law, subject the
Ombudsmans actions to court review only over jurisdictional matters and authorise the
Ombudsman to approach courts to enforce the offices directions and recommendations by
decree.
Impartiality and fairness of procedureare ensured by prescribing qualifications in the law
that will ensure the selection of a person who is widely respected as impartial and fair.
Selection or confirmation is often subject to absolute majority in the legislature and the
Ombudsman is restricted from undertaking any political or other activities that may run into
conflict with his or her duties. Any complainant must have equal access to the Ombudsman
without paying a fee or passing through an intermediary official. The Ombudsman should
have the authority to criticise any agency under his or her jurisdiction and make
recommendations for resolving specific situations or preventing them from recurring.
11 Dean M. Gottehrer, Fundamental Elements of an Effective Ombudsman Institution paper presented at
the World Conference of the International Ombudsman Institute, Stockholm, June 2009.

Where necessary, the Ombudsman should be able to intervene in administrative or judicial

proceedings relevant to the complaint under investigation.
Credible review process requires that the entire governmental apparatus be brought under
the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman and he or she have the powers to investigate anyones
grievances or complaints about any decision, action or recommendation made by public
authorities. The Ombudsman should have powers to launch an investigation suo motu.
Public authorities must be required to cooperate with the investigation or where there is
difficulty the Ombudsman should have powers akin to those of a civil court to requisition
records and examine officials involved in relevant matters. The constituting law must
require the Ombudsman to publicise ones findings and recommendations. Traditionally
speaking, Ombudsmen could only make recommendations but in more recent times the
trend is to make the decisions of such bodies binding but subject to appeal in a court of
superior judiciary.
Confidentialityis a hallmark of the Ombudsman process. People will make complaints only
if they feel confident that they will not become the target of reprisals. Even Government
officials and employees who cooperate with Ombudsman investigations may face
retaliatory action. The Ombudsman is required to keep such complaints and
communications confidential in order to ensure the security and safety of persons involved.
In 1984 the Canadian Supreme Court explained the purpose of Ombudsman-type
institutions in B.C. Development Corporation v Friedmann.12 The Court stated that while
the Ombudsman is a statutory creation, [a]ny analysis of the proper investigatory role the
Ombudsman is to fulfill must be animated by the awareness of [the] broad remedial
purpose for which the office has traditionally been created. Further, the Court said that the
legislative framework create[s] the possibility of dialogue between government authorities
and the Ombudsman; facilitate[s] legislative oversight of the workings of various
government departments and other subordinate bodies; and allow[s] the Ombudsman to
marshal public opinion behind appropriate causes. The Court also noted with approval that
because the Ombudsman often operates informally, Ombudsman investigations do not
12B.C. Dev. Corp. v Friedmann, [1985] 1. W.W.R. 193 (S.C.C.) quoted in Claire Lewis, Q.C., Coping with
Changes on All Fronts: Reaffirming the Ombudsmans Powers and Adapting its Actions Occasional
Paper#77, International Ombudsman Institute, Edmonton, Canada.

impede the normal processes of government. Earlier the Court observed that the growth of
a distant, impersonal, professionalised structure of government has tended to dehumanise
the interaction between citizens and those who serve them. It quoted the statement of H W
R Wade in Administrative Law with approval explaining the role of the Ombudsman as
follows:
But there is a large residue of grievances which fit into none of the regular
moulds, but are nonetheless real. A human system of government must
provide some way of assuaging them, both for the sake of justice and because
accumulating discontent is a serious clog on administrative efficiency in a
democratic country What every form of government needs is some regular
and smooth-running mechanisms for feeding back the reactions of its
disgruntled customers after impartial assessment, and for correcting whatever
may have gone wrong.13

6. POWERS AND DUTIES OF OMBUDSMAN INSTITUTION

The core business of public sector ombudsman remains receiving, investigation and
redressal of citizens complaints related to mal-administration of government agencies or
their functionaries. An interesting feature of ombudsman institution is that it does not
compete with the courts, or act as a further body to which those unsuccessful in the courts
can appeal. The primary function of the Ombudsman is generally to examine14:
i.

A decision, process, recommendation, act of omission or commission which is contrary to

law, rules or regulations, or is a departure from established practice or procedure, unless it
is bona fide and has valid reason; is perverse, arbitrary or unreasonable, unjust, biased,
oppressive or discriminatory; based on irrelevant grounds; or, involves the exercise of
powers or the failure or refusal to do so for reasons of corrupt or improper motives such as

ii.

bribery, jobbery, favouritism, nepotism, and administrative excesses; and,

neglect, inattention, delay, incompetence, inefficiency and ineptitude in the administration
or discharge of duties and responsibilities.

13 Ibid.
14 Establishment of the Office of Wafaqi Mohtasib (Ombudsman) Order 1983, Presidential Order No.1 of
1983. (Amended and updated vide Ordinance No. LXXII of 2002)

Professor Larry Hill15 has described the following six major objectives of the ombudsman
institution: i.

To right individual wrongs.

ii.

To make bureaucracy more humane.

iii.

To lessen popular alienation from government.

iv.

To prevent abuses by acting as a bureaucratic watchdog.

v.

To vindicate civil servants when unjustly accused, and

vi.

To introduce administrative reform.

Commenting on the role of Ombudsman, which was challenged in 1970 in Alberta, Chief
Justice Milvain said: the basic purpose of an Ombudsman is provision of a watchdog designed
to look into the entire workings of administrative cases. [he] can bring the
lamp of scrutiny to otherwise dark places even over the resistance of those who
would draw the blinds. If [his] scrutiny and reservations are well founded,
corrective measure can be taken in due democratic process, if not no harm can
be done in looking at that which is good.16

7. JURISDICTION OF THE OMBUDSMAN

The operational mode of the ombudsman varies greatly according to the activity and
environment. However, in essence, there are two models:
i. Reactive ombudsman who waits for complaints and acts on what has been brought
forward. In Britain, for example, ombudsmen tend to be reactive offices that can only
respond to complaints or grievances, the last port of call in a formal complaints
procedure.
ii. Proactive ombudsman who seeks out matters of concern, inspects and initiates
investigations. In Scandinavia, an ombudsman may initiate action and has an ongoing
inspection role, such as the Public Justice Ombudsman who keeps a watchdog eye on
15 Larry B Hill, The Model Ombudsman: Institutionalizing New Zealands Democratic Experiment
(Princeton, N. J.: Princeton university Press, 1976)
16 Ombudsman Act (1970) (72 WWR 176, 190 and 192)

10

public administration and tackles action to ensure acceptable quality and standards are
maintained.
Criteria Used by Ombudsman to Judge the Official Actions
Ombudsmen apply various criteria for making judgment whether a particular conduct is
proper or improper. Some of the important criteria are: i.

Whether a particular government action concords or conflicts with statutes and

principles, Ideally, an Ombudsman approaches the action broadly and reviews it
both in the light of the provisions of the written law, and in the light of unwritten
legal principles, as well as, against the standards for good governance.

ii.

Investigations of the action in view of the written law include such areas relating to
human and constitutional rights, definitions of competence, and provisions
governing from procedure and substance.

iii.

Investigation of the action in view of the unwritten legal principles (developed in

case law and legal doctrine) are equally relevant to the lawfulness of government
conduct, and include the principles of: equal treatment for equal cases;
reasonableness; proportionality between means and end; legal certainty and of
legitimate expectations; the requirement to provide reasons for decisions; and, of
certain duties of care.

iv.

An Ombudsman also uses standards or guidelines for good governance which

contribute to the decency of the way the executive authorities act. The standards can
be summed up as the imposition of a broad duty of care. These are manifested in
certain accepted standards for administrative processes and the conduct of public
servants in relation to the public. They include the requirement to act without undue
delay; to supply the individual with relevant information; to treat people fairly and
respectfully; and, to be unbiased and helpful.

v.

Finally, the Ombudsman sets standards for the government organization such as
those of coordination, monitoring of progress, protection of the individuals privacy,
and accessibility of the authorities.

8. CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS ON OMBUDSMAN SCHEME

11

The most common criticism of the ombudsman system is that the function is not generally
well understood. There is relatively limited documentation and information about their
work, often confusion and uncertainty about their role, and with the proliferation of
ombudsman offices in different sectors, the confusion can be exacerbated. In spite of the
key characteristic of accessibility, ombudsman offices are frequently noted for their
inaccessibility. Few citizens are aware of the different ombudsman schemes, how to reach
them and how to process a grievance. Inaccessibility is the chief reason why ombudsman
offices tend to be under-utilised, especially by the most disadvantaged who are less likely to
know of the existence of ombudsman and have more difficulty in registering complaints or
grievances. It seems that many ombudsman schemes, particularly in Britain, are hidden by
bureaucracy and formality and lack a human face. The question of visibility is linked to
more general criticisms of the operational mode of the ombudsman as too reactive, waiting
for complaints rather than taking the office to the public or initiating investigations.
The ombudsman office is also criticized for the fact that its effectiveness tends to depend
upon the character and personality of the ombudsman officer(s) themselves rather than the
system as a whole. Regardless of their organizational framework they are a highly
personalized institution and success demands an individual or team who are perceived as
independent and impartial, with relevant qualifications and in-depth knowledge of the
sector, and can command respect and trust from all parties. Of course, such individuals are
hard to find.
Since the ombudsmans powers lie essentially in recommendation there is a genuine
concern that the ombudsman lacks teeth. For instance, the annual report (for many
ombudsmen the only public document issued) is often considered an inadequate instrument
for influencing administration procedures and practice, informing mass media and
educating the public. Moreover, the ombudsman is generally powerless to change or
reverse decisions. In fact, some believe that the ombudsmans powers as critic and reformer
must be strengthened to influence changes in legislation and policy and not just
administrative procedure. The ombudsman should be concerned not merely with laws or
codes as they stand, but also as they might be.

9. LOKPAL: AN ATTEMPT AT ESTABLISHING AN

OMBUDSMAN SYSTEM IN INDIA
12

A Lokpal is a proposed ombudsman in India. The word is derived from the Sanskrit word
lok (people) and pala (protector/caretaker), or caretaker of people.
The Lokpal Bill provides for the filing, with the ombudsman, of complaints of corruption
against the prime minister, other ministers, and MPs.
Efforts to establish an Ombudsman-type institution in India started during the 1970s with
the recommendation to set up a Lokpal for the Government of India being made by the first
Administrative Reforms Commission under the Chairmanships of the Late Shri Morarji
Desai and the Late Shri K Hanumanthaiah. Later the National Commission to Review the
Working of the Constitution under the Chairmanship of Chief Justice (retd.) M N
Venkatachaliah recommended the establishment of the institution of the Lokpal as a
constitutional authority that would help achieve cleaner government. It also recommended
the adoption of a statute for delineating its powers and functions. More recently the second
Administrative Reforms Commission under the Chairmanship of Shri M Veerappa Moily
recommended the establishment of the Rashtriya Lokayukta to investigate complaints of
corruption involving Ministers under the Central Government or Members of Parliament.
Bills were introduced in Parliament more than once but a consensus of views on what an
Ombudsman-type institution namely, the Lokpal should look like and the kinds of powers
that

10.

should

be

vested

in

it

has

eluded

us.

THE LOKPAL AND LOKAYUKTA ACT, 2013

The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 seeks to provide for the establishment of Lokpal for
the Union and Lokayukta for States to inquire into allegations of corruption against certain
public functionaries and for related matters. The act extends to whole of India, including
Jammu & Kashmir and is applicable to public servants within and outside India. The act
mandates for creation of Lokpal for Union Lokayukta for states.

Following are some important features of the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013:
i.
ii.

Lokpal at the Centre and Lokayukta at the level of the states.

Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, of which 50
13

iii.

per cent shall be judicial members.

50 per cent of members of Lokpal shall be from SC/ST/OBCs, minorities and

iv.

women.
The selection of chairperson and members of Lokpal shall be through a selection
committee consisting of Prime Minister, Speaker of Lok Sabha, Leader of
Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Chief Justice of India or a sitting Supreme Court
judge nominated by CJI, eminent jurist to be nominated by the President of India on

v.
vi.
vii.

the basis of recommendationsof the first four members of the selection committee.
Prime Minister has been brought under the purview of the Lokpal.
Lokpals jurisdiction will cover all categories of public servants.
All entities receiving donations from foreign source in the context of the Foreign
Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in excess of Rs 10 lakh per year are brought

viii.
ix.

under the jurisdiction of Lokpal.

Provides adequate protection for honest and upright public servants.
Lokpal will have power of superintendence and direction over any investigation

x.

agency including CBI for cases referred to them by Lokpal.

A high powered committee chaired by the Prime Minister will recommend selection

xi.

of the Director, CBI.

Directorate of Prosecution headed by a Director of Prosecution under the overall

xii.

control of Director.
The appointment of the Director of Prosecution, CBI on the recommendation of the

xiii.

Central Vigilance Commission.

Transfer of officers of CBI investigating cases referred by Lokpal with the approval

xiv.

of Lokpal.
The bill also incorporates provisions for attachment and confiscation of property

xv.

acquired by corrupt means, even while prosecution is pending.

The bill lays down clear time lines for preliminary enquiry and investigation and

xvi.

trial and towards this end, the bill provides for setting up of special courts.
A mandate for setting up of the institution of Lokayukta through enactment of a law
by the State Legislature within a period of 365 days from the date of
commencement of the Act.

The Lokpal in effect will be the investigator, prosecutor and enforcer of its will. When
coupled with the powers to punish for defamation and in the absence of an appellate body,
the draft Bill in fact seeks to create a gigantic institution that draws its powers from a
statute that will be based on questionable principles.

14

11.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

WEBSITES:

http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/ombudsman-critical-appraisal/#_ednref34
http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/role-of-ombudsmanin-the-administration-administrative-law-essay.php#ftn2

BOOKS:
15

I.P Messy : The Administrative Law.

Dr. Paras Diwan : The Administrative Law.
P.P.Craig : The Administrative Law.
Charles Howard: The Organizational Ombudsman: Origins, Roles, and Operations-A Legal Guide

ARTICLES:

A Note on Ombudsman-type Institutions & Jan Lok Pal Bill, 2011 - Prepared by
Justice A P Shah Chief Justice (Retd), Delhi High Court, New Delhi
&VenkateshNayakCommonwealth Human Rights Initiative, New Delhi &CoConvenor, National Campaign for Peoples Right to Information (April 2011)

16