MPs and peers call for “greater human rights focus” in Ombudsperson system but rule out dedicated Human Rights Ombudsperson
The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has called for a ‘new focus’ to enhance the current human rights framework within the existing ombudsperson system.
A report by the committee, which draws its members from the House of Commons and the House of Lords, found, however, that creating a dedicated human rights ombudsperson could risk creating “overlap with the functions of existing bodies”.
The JCHR said that human rights are already considered as part of the work of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) and the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO), and “creating a new additional role risks creating confusion”.
Within the existing system, the JCHR have called for the PHSO and LGSCO to ensure that “human rights standards and principles are embedded in their work and referenced in their decisions”.
The committee said that more work needs to be done to improve awareness of their role, especially with “hard to reach groups” who may be at greater risk of their human rights being infringed by public bodies.
However, the JCHR said they were “pleased to hear” from the PHSO and LGSO that they do consider human rights when determining complaints. The report featured a quote from the PHSO which said: “Human rights are an integral part of the relationship between citizen and state and are therefore necessarily within our remit. We currently treat human rights failings as part of our consideration of maladministration.”
The JCHR report found that Ombudspersons would be “better able to identify systemic human rights failings in public bodies if they were empowered to launch investigations on their own initiative”, adding that public services ombudspersons in Wales and Northern Ireland currently have these powers, but the LGSCO and PHSO do not.
Outlining a solution to this, the committee said that the Government should consider changing the legislation setting out the “role and remit” of the PHSO and LGSCO, in order to provide a “clearer mandate” for them to examine human rights issues.
The JCHR said the Government should also “review the current requirement for complaints to be approved by an individual MP, allowing people to bring their complaint directly”.
The joint committee added: “This will need to be balanced with the importance of maintaining the link between constituents and their MPs.”
It also expressed the view that public authorities should improve their decision-making to ensure they uphold human rights.
Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, Joanna Cherry KC MP said: “Human rights are universal, and while the courts play the central role in enforcing these rights it is important that we look at the broader context in which human rights are protected. A key facet of this are those ombuds who are there to examine complaints made against public bodies.
“While we believe that a dedicated human rights ombud is not needed, that is not to say human rights protections in the existing ombuds framework do not need to be enhanced. There should be a renewed effort to make sure that human rights considerations are a central part of their inquiries and decision making.
“It must also be simple and straightforward to raise a complaint. Raising awareness will be key here but the Government will also need to examine if there are unnecessary blocks that prevent people from doing so in the current system.”
Furthermore, the joint committee is calling on the Government to revisit proposals to create a single Public Service Ombudsman for England, originally set out in its 2016 draft bill. It notes that a simplified ombudsperson system would make it “easier for individuals to know where to make a complaint”.
Lottie Winson
