It cannot alter or reverse any government decision.
If the authority on question refuses to go by the instructions of the Ombudsman, formally they can do nothing more than a special report to the Parliament s 10 (4).
Remedy might not have been so fast, effective or wide ranging.
Argument against the abolition of ombudsmen:
1) The relevant department knows that it will not be possible to conceal the facts from the Parliament and press.
2) The Annual Report shows that Ombudsman has been able to compel departments to pay financial remedies.
3) The PCA has had an impact on certain more High profile cases such as 'Sachsendhausen' case where the PCA found maladministration in distributing compensation. A recent example is the 'Barlow Clowes Affair'.
The select committee published a report in 1994, which identified workable reforms that would improve the effectiveness of the PCA. The SC recommended that-
Procedure: Though the 'MP filter' has been subject to criticism, the current system should be retained. The investigation by the PCA as satisfactory & thus proposed no major reforms.
Jurisdiction: The 1967 Act should be amended to provide that the PCA could investigate all complaints other than those relating to matters specifically excluded. However, the govt. rejected this proposal.
Publicity: PCA's activities should be given more publicity and suggested that this can be done by circulation of an informal newsletter containing details of the PCA's activities.
Operation: appointment should be by the crown or an address at the House of Commons.
However MPs have some great advantages as redressers of grievances. Their services are free and easily accessible; many MPs take great pains to advertise their...
The Human Rights Act 1998 came into force on October 2000 band made it far easier to enforce the European Convention on Human Rights in British courts. It has been observed that the HRA is one of the most revolutionary pieces of legislation to be passed in the UK, to rank alongside the Bill of Rights, the Acts of Union and the European Communities Act 1972. Before this Act, in the late nineteenth-century professor A. V. Dicey stated that Britain had a tradition of civil liberties. Before attempt to discuss the statement it is necessary to consider the provision of section 4 of the HRA 1998. Declarations of incompatibility are regulated under s.4, which provides that, if a Court is satisfied that a provision of primary or subordinate legislation is incompatible with one or more Convention Rights, it may make a declaration of incompatibility. The Courts with jurisdiction to make the declaration of incompatibility are the HL, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the Courts-Martial Appeal Court. Section 4(6), however, contains a vital limitation, in that a declaration of incompatibility does not affect the validity, continuing operation or enforcement of the provision in question, and is not binding on the parties to the proceedings in which it is made.