Ombudsman discusses role, recommendations, and the need for a National Human Rights Institution

Ombudsman discusses role, recommendations, and the need for a National Human Rights Institution

Published February 18, 2025

Parliamentary Ombudsman, Judge Emeritus Joseph Zammit McKeon, was interviewed by MaltaToday journalist Karl Azzopardi, where he discussed key aspects of his work, the effectiveness of recommendations issued by his Office, and the ongoing proposal for Malta to establish a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI).

During the interview, the Ombudsman highlighted the high rate of implementation of recommendations, noting that in 2023 and 2024, 78% of the recommendations were acted upon. While the majority of cases result in positive outcomes, he acknowledged that there are instances where public authorities do not implement the recommendations. In such cases, the Ombudsman follows the procedure outlined in the Ombudsman Act, escalating unimplemented recommendations first to the Prime Minister, and if no action is taken, the matter is then submitted to Parliament.

The Ombudsman also reiterated his Office’s proposal to formally establish a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) in Malta, arguing that Malta remains one of the few EU and Council of Europe member states without such an institution. Instead of creating a separate entity, the Ombudsman has proposed that the existing structure of the Office of the Ombudsman be expanded to include the promotion and protection of human rights, ensuring that individuals do not always have to seek legal action through the courts when their rights are infringed. He emphasised that an NHRI would not only provide redress but also work proactively to promote human rights awareness and education.

In line with this proposal, the Ombudsman took a proactive approach by drafting a comprehensive legal framework for this reform, ensuring that the administration has a working document to build upon. He reaffirmed that the role of the Ombudsman extends beyond investigating complaints, as the Office is also responsible for recommending improvements to public administration and governance.

Another key issue raised in the interview was the need for greater parliamentary scrutiny of the Ombudsman’s reports. The Ombudsman noted that, unlike reports issued by the Auditor General and the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, which are reviewed in parliamentary committees, Ombudsman reports containing unimplemented recommendations are not automatically debated. The Ombudsman made reference to his proposal for the establishment of a dedicated parliamentary select committee that would review reports on cases where recommendations have not been implemented, ensuring greater accountability in public administration.

The interview provided an opportunity for the Ombudsman to highlight the importance of transparency, accountability, and accessibility in public administration, as well as the fundamental role of the Office in safeguarding persons’ rights. He reaffirmed his commitment to strengthening the effectiveness of the Ombudsman’s work and ensuring that the institution continues to serve as a bridge between the public and the authorities.

Read the interview here