COMPARISON OF OMBUDSMAN IN NIGERIA, THE UNITED KINGDOM AND AUSTRALIA TO DETERMINE OPERATIONAL NEXUS FOR GLOBAL BEST PRACTICES

Abstract

The specific objective of this paper was to compare the structure and roles of the Ombudsman in Nigeria, the United  Kingdom and Australia respectively; while the specific objective was to analyze their operational similarities and differences in consonance with the global best practices. Content analysis was adopted in sourcing the data of the study. Thus content analysis of the provision of Ombudsman in Australia showed that Ombudsman was a provision of the country's constitution. United Kingdom and Nigeria Ombudsman owed their existence to the Acts of Parliament or the Statutes. The Ombudsman in the United Kingdom is called “Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration”. He is appointed by the Crown and is an arm of parliament. The Nigerian Ombudsman is called “Public Complaints Commission” and was established by Decree No. 31 of 1975, which (Decree) was amended by the Public Complaints Commission Decree No. 21 of 1979. It has offices in the thirty-six states of the Federation and the Federal Capital. The Commission was empowered to investigate illegal and wrongful administrative acts and other objectionable issues. The entire system of Ombudsman in Australia is designed to handle different issues. Thus the country's Ombudsman is not unitary as it is in Nigeria and the United Kingdom. The study recommended that for the Nigerian and the United Kingdom model of Ombudsman to be independent in carrying out their functions, the structural configuration of the Australian Ombudsman, which serves as a model, should be adopted by the governments of both countries.