ABSTRACT
The Ombudsman1 has been described by all manner of names, some of them patently unfair.2 But perhaps the most apt description is that of the ‘poor man’s lawyer’. The Ombudsman adjudicates over issues, essentially of maladministration and injustice, but without the normal trappings of the judicial process nor the costs attendant thereto. He is thus able to bring to his adjudicatory process informality and simplicity between parties of unequal size and resources. The system of Ombudsman also gives encouragement to open government and, to that extent, helps to bring transparency to the decision making process. Equally important, it also reinforces the notion of political controls over governmental bodies.
