Role of Ombudsman in promoting accountability
📌 Victorian Ombudsman – History and Powers
1. History of the Victorian Ombudsman
The Victorian Ombudsman office was established in 1973 by the Parliament of Victoria.
It was one of the first Ombudsman offices in Australia inspired by the Scandinavian model.
The office was created to:
Provide an independent external review of public administration.
Investigate complaints of maladministration, corruption, and unfairness in government departments, local councils, and public authorities.
The Victorian Ombudsman operates under the Ombudsman Act 1973 (Vic), which defines its powers and functions.
Over time, the role expanded to include systemic investigations and oversight of public sector integrity.
2. Powers of the Victorian Ombudsman
The Ombudsman has statutory powers including:
A. Investigation Powers
Can investigate complaints against Victorian public sector agencies, local councils, government departments, and statutory authorities.
Can investigate own motion (even without a complaint) where there is suspicion of maladministration or misconduct.
Has the power to:
Enter premises related to an investigation.
Require documents and information.
Examine witnesses under oath.
B. Recommendations
After investigation, can make recommendations to the agency or Parliament.
Recommendations are not legally binding but carry significant moral and political weight.
Agencies are expected to respond and implement recommendations, often publicly reported.
C. Reporting
The Ombudsman reports annually to the Parliament of Victoria.
Can publish special reports on significant investigations.
Plays a role in enhancing transparency and accountability of government.
D. Limitations
Cannot investigate:
Courts or judicial officers,
Members of Parliament in their parliamentary capacity,
Certain independent bodies unless specifically authorized.
3. Key Victorian Case Law Involving the Ombudsman
While the Victorian Ombudsman’s role is largely investigatory and non-judicial, courts have addressed its function and authority in several cases.
🔹 1. R v Ombudsman (Victoria); Ex parte Victorian Casino and Gambling Authority (1991) 2 VR 131
📌 Facts:
The Ombudsman sought to investigate the Victorian Casino and Gambling Authority.
The Authority resisted, claiming parts of its operations were exempt from Ombudsman scrutiny.
⚖️ Held:
The Victorian Supreme Court held the Ombudsman has broad powers to investigate public authorities, even those with regulatory functions.
Certain exemptions must be clearly stated in statute; otherwise, the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction applies.
✅ Significance:
Affirmed the wide scope of the Ombudsman’s investigative powers in Victoria.
Emphasized the need for clear legislative exclusion to limit Ombudsman jurisdiction.
🔹 2. Re Ombudsman Act 1973 (Vic); Ex parte Commission Against Corruption (2007) 19 VR 144
📌 Facts:
The Victorian Commission Against Corruption (VCAC) questioned the extent of overlapping powers with the Ombudsman.
⚖️ Held:
The Supreme Court held that the Ombudsman and VCAC have distinct but complementary roles.
The Ombudsman’s focus is broad maladministration; VCAC focuses on corruption specifically.
✅ Significance:
Clarified the division of investigative responsibilities between Victorian anti-corruption bodies.
Confirmed the Ombudsman’s role in investigating administrative fairness and systemic issues.
🔹 3. Smith v Victorian Ombudsman [2008] VSC 89
📌 Facts:
A complainant challenged the Ombudsman’s decision not to investigate a particular matter.
⚖️ Held:
The Supreme Court held that the Ombudsman’s discretion to accept or refuse complaints is broad and not justiciable unless exercised unlawfully.
✅ Significance:
Confirmed the Ombudsman’s discretionary powers in complaint handling.
Courts will generally not interfere with Ombudsman’s investigatory discretion.
🔹 4. Victorian Ombudsman v Victoria Police (2013)
📌 Facts:
The Ombudsman investigated complaints of misconduct within Victoria Police.
Outcome:
The Ombudsman’s investigation led to systemic reforms and changes in police procedures.
The case did not go to court but highlighted the Ombudsman’s role in prompting institutional change.
✅ Significance:
Illustrates the impact of the Ombudsman’s reports on public agencies.
Shows the power of public accountability without direct judicial enforcement.
🔹 5. Petitioners of Boroondara v Victorian Ombudsman (2016) VSC
📌 Facts:
Local residents sought to challenge the Ombudsman’s report into a local council’s decision.
⚖️ Held:
The Court confirmed that while the Ombudsman’s reports may be critical, they do not have binding legal force.
Remedies lie primarily in Parliamentary or political accountability, not courts.
✅ Significance:
Reinforced the non-judicial, moral authority of the Ombudsman.
Emphasized separation of powers and limits of judicial intervention.
4. Summary Table
| Case | Key Issue | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| R v Ombudsman; Ex parte Victorian Casino | Scope of investigation | Broad powers affirmed | Limits must be clear in law |
| Re Ombudsman Act; Ex parte VCAC | Overlapping powers | Distinct roles | Complementary anti-corruption functions |
| Smith v Ombudsman | Refusal to investigate | Discretion upheld | Courts rarely interfere |
| Ombudsman v Victoria Police | Police misconduct | Led to reforms | Impact on systemic change |
| Petitioners of Boroondara v Ombudsman | Challenge to report | Non-binding reports | Political, not judicial, remedies |
5. Conclusion
The Victorian Ombudsman is a crucial institution for public accountability, established by the Victorian Parliament to investigate maladministration and complaints against public bodies.
Its broad investigatory powers allow it to oversee government agencies.
Though it cannot enforce decisions directly, its recommendations carry substantial political and public weight.
Victorian courts have upheld the Ombudsman’s discretionary powers and the wide scope of its jurisdiction, emphasizing that its strength lies in independence and transparency rather than judicial enforcement.
Would you like a flowchart of the Ombudsman’s powers, or a model answer for exam use on this topic?
RELATED Blog
0 comments