Wednesday, February 02, 2011

The Local Government Ombudsman and their twelve pillars of injustice

(1They work in private,  
(2) you can't appeal their findings of fact,
(3) they don't have to be qualified for the job,
(4) they can, and indeed do, delegate their job to a junior member of staff no matter how unqualified or incompetent,
(5) they don't have to show all the evidence to the complainant and they usually don't,
(6) they can and often do talk to the council without the complainant being aware any discussion took place,
(7) they settle the complaint with the council. A complainant can't refuse such a settlement,

(8) they don't have to follow previous decisions/precedents/case law,
(9) they are free to define maladministration as they see fit,
(10) they are free to determine the level of injustice you must suffer before investigating your complaint,
(11) they are free to engage in propaganda (or as Justice Lightman calls it an evangelical agenda),
(12) they probably don't meet the requirements of the Human Rights Act. Justice Lightman's view.

Compare the LGO twelve pillars of injustice above to the Courts/Tribunal twelve pillars of justice below. 

(1) Court proceedings are held in public, 
(2) either side can appeal a judgement on a finding of fact, 
(3) the judge is qualified,
(4) a judge can't delegate their job to a junior member of staff, 
(5) all evidence is shown to both sides, 
(6) a judge can't talk to one side without the other side being present, 
(7) any out of court settlement is agreed between the two parties. The judge plays no part, 
(8) they have to follow case law or provide a valid reason for not doing so, 
(9) statutory definitions exist for all legal wrongs, 
(10) a judge can't stop you taking court action even if the injustice you have suffered is slight, 
(11) a judge cannot use self promoting publicity (propaganda),   
(12) all court/tribunal cases have to be human rights compliant. 

Why do we have such a corrupt system of administrative justice in this country?

Because our elected representatives prefer it that way. Elected representatives are responsible for public bodies and the last thing they want, should a public body do anything wrong, is for the public bodies they control to be exposed let alone held responsible for their actions. For if that were to happen they may just get booted out come election time.

The only way to bury the wrongdoings of a public body, or at least minimise the repercussions of any wrongdoings, is to stop people using a proper system of justice in the first place. As a result our elected representatives introduced the Local Government Ombudsman, one of the most unjust systems of administrative justice ever invented. Once our elected representatives introduced a pseudo system of administrative justice all that was left for them to do was to staff it with as many ex public authority people as possible and hey presto.... a system that stuffs the citizen for the benefit of our elected representatives by burying the wrongdoings of the public bodies they control and as such are responsible for.

Why not ask your MP why we have such a corrupt system of administrative justice in this country. If they argue we haven't, explain the differences above and then ask them to justify such a corrupt and biased system of administrative justice.  If they can't, vote for someone who will do something about the problem when they seek re-election.

No comments:

Post a Comment