OMBUDSMAN VISITS MORE PLACES OF DETENTION
Staff of the Human Rights Unit under the Office of the Ombudsman recently embarked on a trek to the regions from 4 to 15 February 2019.
The purpose of the trek was to visit places of detention in the North Bank Region, Lower River Region and Upper River Region in line with the Ombudsman’s mandate to visit prisons, police cells and other detention centres,
While in the regions, the team visited a total of 16 police stations, 11 police posts, 3 immigration stations and 1 military barracks, with a total of 28 cells of which 1 was a military cell while the rest were police cells.
It was a continuation of previous visits which took Ombudsman and staff to the three prisons; namely, Mile Two, Jewshwang and Janjanbureh prisons as well as all the police cells in Banjul, Kanifing Municipality, West Coast Region and Central River Region.
The Office of the Ombudsman will continue to engage the relevant stakeholders with a view to ensuring that the human rights and welfare of all persons under detention are protected at all times. Equally, the Ombudsman seeks to ensure that the working conditions of staff of the institutions in charge of detainees are also enhanced.
PRESS RELEASE ON THE PUBLICATION OF OMBUDSMAN REPORT ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION (SSHFC) STAFF PETITION AGAINST THEIR MANAGING DIRECTOR ON THE MEDIA
The Office of the Ombudsman has noted that its report on the SSHFC staff petition has been published and is being circulated on social media. The Office wishes to strongly dissociate itself from this act.
We wish to draw the attention of the people to the fact that confidentiality is one of the tenets of Ombudsmanship and the Office has always maintained confidentiality during and after investigations. It has never deviated from the observance of this important tenet since its inception.
Investigations at the Office of the Ombudsman are done in camera and one of its annual reports, which is sent to the National Assembly does not include the names of persons in line with Section 15( 3) of the Ombudsman Act. This is because the report to the National Assembly is a public document and the identities of people are not to be revealed.
One of the reasons people have trust and confidence in the Ombudsman system of dispensing administrative justice is the confidentiality they are assured of. The investigations are done in camera as opposed to other systems of dispensing administrative or other forms of justice, which is one of the things which makes Ombudsman an alternative.
However, it is to be noted that as a matter pf practice, the Ombudsman shares its findings with individuals and institutions that are parties to a complaint. This is done because parties have a right to the complaints they have lodged with the Ombudsman as well as those whose conduct are the cause of investigation. It is hoped that parties will help the Ombudsman in maintaining confidentiality of copies of reports issued to them.
Although the Ombudsman may choose to publish its findings in the interest of the public in line with Section ( 10) (2), of the Ombudsman Act, it has not done so in the SSHFC staff petition just as in all previous complaints it has investigated. This is meant to encourage more people to lodge their complaints with the Office of the Ombudsman.
It is hoped that together we will continue to uphold the values, practices and procedures that are characteristic of a good system of dispensing administrative justice in which all parties have explicit trust and confidence.
The Office of the Ombudsman, your partner in the service of administrative justice.
PRESS RELEASE ON SIT-DOWN STRIKES BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
The Office of the Ombudsman is concerned about the increasing trend in the use of sit-down strike by public officers as a means of settling grievances.
The Office of the Ombudsman wishes to draw the attention of public officers to the fact that this approach is at complete variance with laid-down procedures and violates the terms and conditions of appointment of public officers.
It is understood that we have a conducive democratic space in the country, and it appears that certain people have the notion that it is within their democratic rights to employ any method to settle their grievances. In reality, this is the perfect way to undermine any democratic process and undo the gains already made.
Democracy is about rules and adhering to those rules. It is about institutions, and ensuring that those institutions cater to the needs of the citizenry. Grievance and redress are important tenets of democratic good governance. Happily our system has provided for it by putting in place mechanisms and laid-down procedures for seeking redress.
Public officers are bound by rules and regulations. To embark on a strike in any form, without reporting to your place of work, is simply absenteeism from work without permission in contravention of the General Orders, the Public Service Commission Regulations, and the Code of Conduct for the Civil Service.
Having grievances does not justify abandoning ones responsibility – the obligation to do what one has been appointed to do. Such actions negatively affect innocent citizens who have a right to the services that we have been appointed to render.
The laws recognize the rights of public officers to channel their grievances through the appropriate authorities. The Office of the Ombudsman exists specifically as a public sector complaints institution where public officers can seek redress if they feel they have been unjustly or unfairly treated by their employers.
The same way employers are not above the law, employees are equally not above the law. We should not employ unlawful means to make legitimate demands.
The Office of the Ombudsman, your partner in the service of administrative justice.