 |
The Hanns Seidel Foundation (HSF) in cooperation with Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF) and the Habibie Centre (THC) conducted a workshop and lecturing on “the Establishment of an Ombudsman Institution” in Jakarta on 4 November 2009.
About 50 participants from universities, NGOs, international organizations, embassies in Jakarta, think tanks and government have attended the workshop that was opened by Chairman of THC and Head of Indonesian National Resilience Board (LEMHANAS), Prof. Dr. Muladi, ASEF Board Governor, Ambassador Soemadi Brotodiningrat and Director of HSF, Dr. Ulrich Klingshirn. Prof. Dr. Reol Fernhout, a former Ombudsman of the Netherlands, Prof. Dr. CFG. Sunaryati Hartono, SH., Deputy Chairman Ombudsman Indonesia and Dr. M Fajrul Falaakh, Gajah Mada University were present as speakers. The workshop was moderated by Lilis Suryani LLM, the Habibie Center.
The workshop discussed the importance of the Ombudsman institution as a defender of public complaints from maladministration of civil servant’s services or public services that lead to injustice. Regarding that the Ombudsman acts to make the government accountable for the way it treats individual citizens. Moreover, a proper application will bring the institution to be part of an international Ombudsman association. Unfortunately, the established Indonesian Ombudsman institution is not yet a member of the International Ombudsman Institute (IOI), hence, Indonesia needs to comply with the following criteria for its membership in IOI:
A public institution whether titled Ombudsman, Mediator, Parliamentary Commissioner, People's Defender, Human Rights Commission, Public Complaints Commission, Inspector General of Government, Public Protector, shall be eligible for Institutional membership, provided exercises fully the following functions and meets the following criteria:
1. It is created by enactment of a legislative body whether or not it is also provided for in a Constitution;
2. Its role is to protect any person or body of persons against maladministration, violation of rights, unfairness, abuse, corruption, or any injustice caused by a public authority;
3. It does not receive any direction from any public authority which would compromise its independence and performs its functions independently of any public authority over which jurisdiction is held;
4. It has the necessary powers to investigate complaints by any person or body of persons who considers that an act done or omitted, or any decision, advice or recommendation made by any public authority within its jurisdiction has resulted in actions of the kind specified in subparagraph 2) above;
5. It has the power to make recommendations in order to remedy or to prevent any of the conduct described in subparagraph 2), and, where appropriate, to propose administrative or legislative reforms for better governance;
