Axis of Logic

Finding Clarity in the 21st Century Mediaplex

Featured
The Australian Ombudsman
By Ghali Hassan, Axis of Logic
Axis of Logic exclusive
Friday, Jan 1, 2010

The role of the Ombudsman is ‘to safeguard the rights of citizens by establishing a supervisory
agency independent of the executive branch’. Unlike Sweden – where an Ombudsman was first
established in 1809 –, in Australian, the Ombudsman is a tool of the executive branch to legitimate
and protect corruption and maladministration.

The Australian Ombudsman is a large organisation. In addition to the Commonwealth Ombudsman,

every state and territory has a state Ombudsman. It provides privileged employment to mostly
white Anglo-Australians and the few exotic faces that have become an Australian requirement just
for the purpose of ticking the “multicultural” or Aboriginal box. They are busy protecting the
government and its agencies.

On its website, the Ombudsman states

“We are free of control by any government body and act independently”.
Our aim is to be fair and find out the truth.
Our aim is to work out reasonable solutions that are in the public interest”.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The Australia Ombudsman is a government-funded office.
The claim that it acts “independently” is a shame. The Ombudsman lacks impartiality and honesty.
Its primary aim is to act against public interest by protecting the government and its agencies and
cover-up maladministration. The annual Ombudsman report which often publishes few investigated
cases is a fraud designed to con and misleads the public. In addition, having an Ombudsman
protects Australia’s manufactured image.

The focus of this article is the NSW Ombudsman.

The NSW Ombudsman is appointed without the process of public selection. And the current
Ombudsman did not have to undergo a competitive process for reappointment. Under the
Ombudsman Act 1974, the Ombudsman has significant powers, including a wide jurisdiction over
public sector agencies and many private agencies that provide services for them. In 2007, a report
by Inspector Glynis Cameron – conducted from July 2000 to January 2004 – found that corrupt
practices in NSW government and police extend into the offices of the NSW Ombudsman. In other
words, the Ombudsman is deeply complicit in corruption and acted to protect and cover-up
corruption and maladministration. Indeed, the State of NSW is the most corrupt, and has been so
from its inception. It is second only to Queensland.

Anyone makes a complaint to the Ombudsman will receive the following statement: “We are
assessing your complaint and we will decide whether we need to speak with the agency about your
concerns. Often, they [the agencies] will give a solutions or an explanation that satisfies us. If this
happens, we will contact you within four weeks to let you know the results”. In fact, the
Ombudsman is always satisfied with the agency explanation. The Ombudsman connives with the
agency to whitewash wrongdoing and maladministration.

The case of a Muslim student who was excluded from the University of Western Sydney (UWS) early
this year is particularly instructive. The student was racially abused and assaulted by one of the
University’s unskilled Anglo staff. Despite overwhelming evidence of racially-motivated assault and
the fact that the staff has admitted using racist language and violence, the University concocted and
used baseless allegations to justify the student’s exclusion. The student was accused of calling
another Anglo staff a “racist”, a form of bullying employed by Anglo-Australians not only to
intimidate their victims of racism, but also to legitimise and normalise racism. While the student
was denied the right to view the “evidence” against him and was excluded from the University just
few months before he was scheduled to complete his graduate study, the accused staff continues to
enjoy the protection and support of the University.

When the student made a complaint to the NSW Ombudsman against the unfair and rather racist
conduct of the University of Western Sydney, the Ombudsman took its time and never consulted
with the student. After more than five months of deliberate delay, and even when there is
overwhelming evidence of flagrant administrative misconduct and miscarriage of procedural fairness
by the University, the Ombudsman declined to investigate the case. Indeed, the Ombudsman
declined to investigate the case, because it will be against the Ombudsman role to act in public
interest. There is no right of appeal against the Ombudsman’s decision.

The Ombudsman informed the students that, “I do not consider there is any evidence of wrong
administrative conduct by the University that would warrant a formal investigation by this office. It
appears to me the university’s [UWS] investigation of the circumstances surrounding your exclusion
was thorough and you were given an opportunity [by UWS] to represent your version of events,
which was clearly considered by the Appeals Committee”. It appears that the Ombudsman connived
with the University to victimise the student.

The student told me: “It was an outrageous and misleading allegation by the Ombudsman. How the
Ombudsman, sitting in his nice Sydney CBD Office, knows that there was an independent and fair
Appeals Committee? The administrative process by the University was a farce and a case of
miscarriage of procedural fairness. The Hearing was unfair and the Appeal Committee lacks
impartiality and professionalism. Its members were all white Anglo-Saxons and showed clear
practical injustice and prejudice towards students from non-Anglo-Saxon background. They were
aggressive, provocative and racist during the entire Hearing”. The student was denied the right to
have a legal representative during the Hearing. The University allowed the student to be
accompanied by a “silent” University staff to the Hearing.

In a civilised, progressive and classless society like Sweden, the role of the Ombudsman is to protect
the public from misconduct and maladministration by the government and its unscrupulous
agencies. By contrast in a racist and backward society like Australia, which thrives on corruption
and cronyism, the role of the Ombudsman is to legitimate and protects these values.

Ghali Hassan is an independent writer living in Australia.