GoOD ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICE Another example in this group is the rules laying down that citizens must be treated in a polite and considerate way. This also applies to the tone and style of letters written by authorities to citizens. It is patronising and contrary to good administrative practice to write for instance: ‘In reply, we will endeavour to make you understand (…) without further examining your layman’s legal considerations, we note that (…)’ (Annual Report of the Parliamentary Ombudsman, 1990, p. 162). Good administrative practice also implies that the administration is obliged not only to write to citizens politely and correctly, but also to endeavour to use simple, comprehensible language which as far as possible is adapted to the recipient’s background. Group D comprises general rules and guidelines which are not linked to rules of law or directly associated with the processing of specific cases involving citizens. For instance, it includes the guidelines on how the individual administrations should make themselves accessible to citizens. Examples are reasonable opening hours for personal or telephone contact, suitable notice boards or other similar information and physical conditions taking account of any discretion required. The specific requirements obviously depend on the nature of the individual administration’s activities and the extent to which it directly serves citizens. Some standards relating purely to orderliness also belong to this group, for instance that the documents of a case must be kept together or at least placed in the correct context and must be retrievable or that correct and comprehensive records must be kept by the authorities. ESTABLISHED CUSTOM It may be questioned whether the term ‘good administrative practice’ is fully adequate. ‘Practice’ usually refers to what is normally done and has been done for a long time, a kind of custom – that which is ‘established custom’. A look at the development of good administrative practice reveals that quite often the rules have been introduced as something which should be done rather than a reflection of what the administration is already doing. Nonetheless, the use of the term ‘practice’ is probably defensible. After all, it is not a mysterious phenomenon totally disassociated from normal standards of behaviour. On the contrary, most good administrative practice reflects the common understanding of what is decent, polite and reasonable in inter-human behaviour, with the addition of ordinary common sense and some sense of order. The Ombudsman’s efforts to develop and enforce good administrative practice are therefore to a large extent a matter of transferring ordinary good behaviour to the administration’s case processing and behaviour towards citizens. 13