Ombudsman anno 2012
budsman because he is elected by Parliament, even though Parliament does not
as such get involved in the individual cases. It is also connected with the strong
support in principle of the Ombudsman institution traditionally shown by the
Danish administration. However, the pivotal factor should be that the Ombudsman carries out his function in such a way that the administration simply
recognises that his views are right and reasonable, because in the long term, it is
better to get the authorities to comply with the Ombudsman’s recommendations
because they understand and recognise them than because it is, so to speak,
poor form not to.
Fundamentally, the Ombudsman’s influence should thus be based on respect by
the authorities – combined with strong Parliamentary backing. Above all, this
requires the Ombudsman institution to represent high legal quality, but it also
imposes some other important demands:
Firstly, the Ombudsman must remember – even though he exists for the indi
vidual citizen – that the Danish administration overall is competent and professional. That does not change the fact that the Ombudsman’s day-to-day task is
to keep a critical eye on the administration, because nonetheless the authorities
may, for instance, be mistaken about legal matters, be too superficial in their
case processing or treat citizens contrary to general principles of quick case
processing, politeness and consideration. Of course the Ombudsman must take
action against such things, but at the same time he must not forget to recognise
the administration and its many competences as well.
Secondly, the Ombudsman must make sure that he deals with the right issues.
The Ombudsman has the privilege of being able to decide himself which cases
to take up and which issues in the cases to investigate. The intention is that the
Ombudsman is to assess himself where and how his resources are best used.
Therefore, the Ombudsman must not waste effort on insignificant formality
issues, but concentrate on cases where important rights may have been neglected or where issues of fundamental importance need to be clarified. The latter
applies in relation to Danish law, but definitely also very much in relation to for
instance EU law and international human rights, which are increasingly important to the individual citizen. And, interestingly, cases involving issues of fundamental importance keep coming up. In my first two months as Ombudsman,
I have, for instance, already considered issues as different as the freedom of
expression of public-sector employees, the clearing of the Scala building by the
Copenhagen Police, local authorities’ obligation to obtain sufficient evidence in
the battle against social fraud and the health service’s treatment of babies born
alive following a late abortion.
11