By Basil Fernando –

It should be made very clear from the start the suggested permanent commission or an office for review of the justice system is not one geared towards punishment of any of the offenders. Neither is it one where there would be direct powers to implement its own recommendations, where it makes such recommendations for improvements.

The purpose of a permanent commission or something like ombudsman office with adequate powers to engage in a constant review of the various problems that arise in the branches of the administration of justice, such as the policing, prosecution, the judicial institutions, as well as the prisons, is meant for creating adequate understanding in the establishment as a whole, and also naturally, of the governments and relevant Authorities about the causes or reasons for the type of recurring problems with the view of getting as many people’s points of view about these issues, which could then be transferred into recommendations, which could be considered by the governments, as well as relevant authorities and The society at large.

In essence, it is an office that creates a deeper, insightful understanding of how the setting problems, or the systems arise or arisen, and also the consequences they are of and finding recommendations to deal with more difficult and intricate problems, which Cause, which has caused dissatisfaction of the people against the system.

Of particular importance would be that the reports made by such an office or a permanent commission could be a constant source that could be referred to by the parliament and various parliamentary committees and the ministries and the like, so that they would have an authoritative source to rely on in dealing with various problems that arise in the cause of administration of justice.

At this particular moment, criticisms are very acute. Failures within the policing system, in particular, which are not necessarily directly a product of individuals, but of various problems that exist within the system could be seen all the time. Normal approach is that wherever difficulties arise and wherever there are, even some grave falls to blame the individuals and sometimes to take various actions for assuming punishments against these individuals. However, despite of individuals being changed, the problems persist. That shows, while there may be individuals who contribute more to problems, there are other issues which also creates the milieu or the ethos for happening of these problems.

Most of the time these problems goes unnoticed or even notice unrecognized, because there are no avenues through which to deal with the recognition of these problems and to take necessary steps in order to sometimes quickly, but most of the time, gradually to make corrections. It may be that there are certain leaders, particularly on the institutions, who are more far sighted and creative and noble in their intentions and instinct and they do try to take certain actions in order to have a better performance on the institutions that they represent. However, when that such officers move away, very often the reforms or changes that they were proposed also is lost, and the next person may not share the kind of concerns that the other person in leadership and share. Whatever it is there is in under these circumstances, there is no continuity, and also there is no in depth understanding that grows daily with the creation of impressions in the minds of the community, that a gradual process of change is definitely happening.

Another advantage of such an office is that people do have an access to a place where they could not merely make only individual complaints, but they could give their studied opinions to a section of These institutions themselves, so that the participation of citizens in the policy making processes become even better, facilitated. This is an aspect that is very much missing in Sri Lanka. Most of the complaints are about individual instances which happens to particular persons, and then once the interest in that is lost, that issue itself is forgotten. Instead, an office of the nature that we are speaking about could have sections where studied comments of citizens of various sorts, that is, people who have been engaged in particular sections and have gained experiences and who would like to pass on whatever knowledge they have gained could deposit their observation for whatever they that is worth to such institutions. The level of knowledge that may arise in this way, may be, may surpass every other form of knowledge. Experienced persons in various capacities, smaller jobs as well as higher jobs, come in contact with society and also with their own institutions, and begin to be aware of the kind of limitations that is present at a given moment. That knowledge when passed into the institution. Could be studied in relation to other experiences, and then at the end, studied recommendations may evolve, which makes the work of the authorities, such as parliamentary committees, the governments and also the leadership initiatives of particular institutions could be enriched by such knowledge.

Knowledge based reform is What is mostly lacking in Sri Lankan context. Most attempts to introduce changes are mere reactions to particular protest or particular forms of dissatisfaction that arises from time to time due to various events which may create shock in the community. For example, if there are a large number of deaths that are happening within a particular period, then there can be a reaction to that from society, which forces the authorities to do something Extra in order to get over the problem. If there are such problems as, for example, heavy increase of drug related crimes and that really begin reaches a level which creates enormous insecurity, then the authorities may be pressurized to take extra measures and to demonstrate the aids determination to deal with that evil. Similar things happened in relation to robberies, in relation to corruption, in relation to almost every other form of crime. Extra actions taken at times is purely a reaction to a greater breakdown, so that the breakdown could be brought down to an extent which is not considered unbearable. The problem does not get addressed gradually with the idea of complete elimination of that problem. But what takes place mostly is kind of a damage control under great stress.

What a permanent mission or an office does is to keep on addressing the problem, even when the problem does not manifest itself externally, by way of creating breakdowns. underneath it begins to recognize problems that are growing underneath like the same way as we notice changes on the weather or changes relating to health, long before things turn into a situation of into a critical situation.

The dealing constantly only with critical situations, creates a very disturbed society. Society constantly is kept disturbed by various events, which today may be on one issue tomorrow, another issue and like that. Meanwhile, while in fact, the ultimate roots of each of these problems is maybe very much linked the knowledge-based reform approach helps The Society and the governments to think ahead and to deal with these problems and to avoid Reaching critically wrongful situation,

A stable society is primarily a society in which there is as least amount of the critical points of crisis as possible. Day to day life should go on as if no such big problems are taking place. Strong it helps the people to concentrate their minds into their own affairs, into the affairs about society, into production related issues, into social issues, and other things instead of daily being agitated by some kind of disturbances, which does not allow them to be engaged in that manner.

Once again, it needs to be stressed that there is no need to be threatened by such an ombudsman or permanent commission because it itself do not have any powers of implementation or any powers of interference into the system. The system operators will be those who have legal authority to do so, either by way of elections or by way of the job descriptions that they have and the mandates that are given to them through their jobs,  Ombudsman and the team must be of a very mature people who, on the one hand, knows to gather information without causing conflicts, and at the same time to handle information in a way that they would be serving a purpose of assisting the administration then becoming an alternative administration. Ombudsman is not an alternative administrator. It’s the such office plays a role of a more mature observer and impartial institution which does not in any way, aims to pursue individuals or to punish parties or political establishments. such is not the purpose of an ombudsman office. Ombudsman office is more like Auditor General’s office, and even with the less implementation powers.

What is needed is an ongoing, genuine in-depth discussion of a radically backward situation of the system of administration of justice that is present now. In trying to deal with it in the manner suggested initiations can be made in a way for more permanent changes that may avoid in the future such collapse into more critical situations.