Conference of board of directors, Asian ombudsmen association at islamabad

CONFERENCE OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS, CONFERENCE OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS, ASIAN OMBUDSMEN ASSOCIATION AT ISLAMABAD INAUGURAL ADDRESS By Mr. Justice Irshad Hasan Khan, Chief Justice of Pakistan [22nd February, 2000] Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, President, Asian Ombudsmen Association/Federal Ombudsman and Senior Puisne Judge, Supreme Court of Pakistan; Hon'ble Mr. Yuan Chunqing, General Secretary and Vice Minister, Ministry of Supervision, Peoples Republic of China; Hon'ble Mr. Alice Yuen‑ying TAI, Ombudsman, Hong Kong; Hon'ble Sayyid Ebrahim Ra'iesee, Head of the General Inspection Organization, Islamic Republic of Iran; Hon'ble Mr. Hisao Tsukamoto, Councillor, Administrative Inspection Bureau, Japan; Hon'ble Dr. Chu Kwang il, Chief Ombudsman, Republic of Korea; Hon'ble Ms. Teresa Veloso, Legal Adviser, Macau; Hon'ble Mr. Margarito P. Gervacio, Jr., Overall Deputy Ombudsman, Republic of Philippines; Hon'ble Prof. Bertram Bastiampillai, Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, Sri Lanka; Hon'ble Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, Senior Advisor to the Chief Executive of Pakistan and Member, National Security Council, Government of Pakistan; Hon'ble Mr. Aziz A. Munshi, Attorney‑General for Pakistan, Distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen! It gives me immense pleasure to welcome the respected Members of the Asian Ombudsmen Association on their visit to Pakistan and its capital city, Islamabad. I am happy to note that this has been the second international congregation in Pakistan, after the Conference of International Ombudsman Institute, in October, 1998. Islamabad, as you may have noticed, is one of the most modern and well‑planned cities of the world. Situated in a picturesque surrounding in the lap of lower ranges of Himalayan Mountain the city offers several panoramic views of scenic beauty. I trust that the distinguished guests would find time to enjoy the natural beauty of the place and meet its people who are sufficiently warm and hospitable, to have a pleasant time during their sojourn. Pakistan is blessed with vast natural resources and industrious people. The people, with their distinct cultures, are descendants of rich ancient and well‑known civilizations of Harrapa and Mohenjodaro and also the rich Islamic culture. The present state of socio‑cultural development thus reflects a blending of glorious ancient traditions and modern cultural values. Occasions like the present Asian Ombudsman Conference indeed offer a useful opportunity to meet with compatriots in the Region, so as to exchange views and share peculiar experiences in respect of the performance and functioning of the Institution of Ombudsman. This Institution is an old and respected institution. It is indeed a useful means for redressing the grievances of the people and alleviating their sufferings and agonies, through speedy disposal of complaints. The institution is further beneficial for ensuring the accountability of public agencies, by checking the abuse and misuse of power by public functionaries. This is precisely what the principles of Islamic justice emphasise and has been the aim of successive Governments in Pakistan. The Institution of Ombudsman is traceable to early Islamic period. The Righteous Caliphs established the Office of Mohtasib to give redress to the grievances of the people. The Turkish Caliphate put it on firmer footing. The Envoys of Scandinavian Countries to Turkey were deeply impressed by the Turkish set‑up and forwarded favourable Reports to their Governments. Sweden, after due deliberations established the office of Ombudsman. Other countries followed the pattern. In Pakistan, among others, Chief Justice A.R. Cornelius and Chief Justice Hamood‑ur‑Rehman suggested its adoption. In or about 1982 the Draft Ombudsman Order was placed for consideration before the Majlis‑e‑Shoora. A heated debate took place. Mr. Sharifuddin Pirzada, the then Law Minister gave cogent and convincing replies to the critics. The motion was adopted unanimously. Eminent jurists were appointed Ombudsmen, and acting appointments were held by Senior Judges of the Supreme Court who were nominated by the Chief Justice of Pakistan. The Institution has made great contribution by providing relief to aggrieved persons in cases of maladministration and has proved to be effective and efficacious remedy. The Supreme Court of Pakistan has, in its judgments, dealt with provisions of the Ombudsman Order, specially about the Appellate forum provided therein. While speaking of the Institution of Ombudsman, I should make mention of the Founding Ombudsman of Pakistan, namely, Mr. Justice (Retd.) Sardar Muhammad Iqbal, former Chief Justice of Lahore High Court. His exemplary hard work, devotion and dedicated efforts contributed a great deal in establishing and institutionalizing the Office of Ombudsman. His successors have also taken a keen interest in further strengthening the Institution of Ombudsman. Knowing as I do know, the judicial acumen, administrative capability, hard work, devotion to duty and integrity of Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, I have no doubt in mind that he would follow the rich traditions of his predecessors and be able to further improve the performance of the Institution. In an Appeal before the Supreme Court in the case of Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Tariq Pirzada (1999 SCMR 2744) followed by Review of the same judgment (1999 SCMR 2189), the Court discussed, inter alia, the performance of this Institution and commended its contribution in redressing public grievances through prompt and cheap disposal of petitions. The Court observed:‑‑‑ "The President under the Order is a statutory body and has to function as such under the provisions and the scheme envisaged by the Order. It could not be the intention of the Legislature that disposal of the representation be made in an arbitrary manner. Even if it is assumed that the institution of Wafaqi Mohtasib is an administrative body and the President also acts in administrative capacity while disposing of a petition under Article 32 of the Order, an aggrieved person in whose favour a recommendation has been made/finding recorded by the Mohtasib, has legal right to demand that an adverse decision should not be taken against him in violation of the principle of natural justice. It is true that there is no provision for affording a hearing either to the person who lodged a complaint before the Mohtasib or the representationist. Nevertheless, a favourable order having accrued in favour of a complainant, cannot be brushed aside by setting aside the recommendation of the Mohtasib without assigning any reason whatsoever. The recording of valid reasons while setting aside the recommendations of the Mohtasib, would be the minimum requirement of law consistent with the principle of natural justice, under the scheme of the Order. It would be seen that under Article 32 of the Order, any conceivable just and proper order can be passed, depending upon the facts of each case. The phrase 'as he may deem fit' implies that the President has jurisdiction, power and competence to pass all proper and necessary orders as the facts of each case justify and in doing so he must decide rightly and in accordance with law." While disposing of the review petition filed by the Federation, it was held:‑‑‑ "It is true that Article 32 of the Order does not prescribe the time within which a representation is to be finally disposed of, nevertheless, justice and fair play demand that all such representations should be disposed of within a reasonable time. On the question of the quantum of time to be considered as reasonable for disposal of representations, having regard to the purposes of the Order, we are inclined to hold that representation under Article 32. of the Order normally should be disposed of within 90 days from the date of its presentation, except for valid reasons existing for extending the time further, under intimation to all concerned " Time and again, the Government has issued appropriate directions to the State agencies and public functionaries to follow and implement the orders and decisions of the Ombudsman. Such directions specifically provide for prompt execution of Ombudsman's orders and directions in cases involving the payment of pension, gratuities and other benefits on retirement and for redressing the grievances of widows, orphans, invalid and other deserving persons. Nothwithstanding the contribution of the Institution of Ombudsman to the redress of public grievances, rectification of instances of injustices and provision of prompt and cheap justice at the doorstep, the common man expects much more. There is always a scope for improved efficiency and better performance. System of administration of justice in the civilized world including USA, UK, India and Pakistan is confronted with work load. If the Judicial System is allowed to function without any let or hindrance and if it works well, the people can live their lives peacefully and enjoy freedom, security of their persons as well as the rewards of their labour. If the Judicial System works badly then the lives of the people would be marred by constant fear of crime including terrorism. Continual addition of Judges and Courts in all branches of law is a temporary solution to the backlog crises. What is, therefore, required is the strategy to be evolved, determining the priorities and objectives in a coherent and constructive way. A genuine effort must be made by all and sundry for the maintenance of independence of judiciary and encouragement of public confidence in the judicial system. The independence of judiciary requires that the judiciary shall decide matters before it in accordance with its impartial assessment of the facts and its understanding of the law without improper influences, direct or indirect, from any source. The Judiciary in Pakistan is independent. It claims and has always claimed that it has the right to interpret the Constitution and any legislative instrument and to say as to what a particular provision of the Constitution or a legislative instrument means or does not mean, even if that particular provision is a provision seeking to oust the jurisdiction' of the Supreme Court. In the 6th Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific held in Beijing "Beijing Statement of Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary in the LAWASIA Region", was adopted, highlighting therein the objectives and functions of the Judiciary including the following:‑‑‑ (a) to ensure that all persons are able to live securely under the Rule of Law; (b) to promote, within the proper limits of the judicial function, the observance and the attainment of human rights; and (c) to administer the law impartially among persons and between persons and the State. The Institution of Ombudsman in Pakistan can play a very effective, meaningful and historic role in controlling litigation explosion in Courts relating to acts of maladministration of public functionaries, by providing cheap and expeditious justice to the people at their doorstep. I trust that Mr. Justice Muhammad Bashir Jehangiri, Ombudsman of Pakistan would take up the challenges by putting sustained efforts to achieve the stipulated goals of correcting acts of maladministration rectifying the injustices and abuse of discretionary powers. I trust that the Conference of the Board of Directors of Asian Ombudsman Association would furnish an opportunity to discuss the common issues and devise newer, pragmatic and practical methods of redressal of complaints and grievances, in a prompt and efficient manner. I have no doubt in my mind that the Conference would accomplish its stipulated goals. I wish the participants' fruitful deliberations and success. Thank you once again, ladies and gentlemen, for your attention.