Media reports that the legislation for the establishment of Ombudsman Malaysia — an independent body to address the wide range of public complaints against government departments or agencies — is now slated for Parliament tabling in October.

It is said that the federal government was in the final stage of engaging stakeholders such as non-governmental organisations and civil society organisations to fine-tune the bill for eventual Cabinet approval.

In justifying the establishment of the said Ombudsman, the minister of law reasoned "when we speak of accountable government, one of the elements is that complaints must be allowed".

Historically speaking, the initial proposal for the establishment of Ombudsman Malaysia to replace the Public Complaints Bureau was made in 2018 by then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. I was privy to that proposal in that at the material time I was a deputy minister of law.

When PAS became a government in Terengganu for the first time, it established a hisbah institution — the Islamic version of ombudsmanship. It seemed that such an institution was merely a lip service exercise without any meaningful achievements. Truth be said, the idea of establishing an Ombudsman is remarkable indeed, at least in theory. In essence, ombudsmanship is about transparency and accountability — the hallmark of good governance.

It is often said that the first modern ombudsman’s office was established in Sweden in 1809 with the sole aim of protecting the rights of citizens against the executive branch.

Many believe that in order to have a functioning and workable ombudsman system, the following two primary ingredients ought to be present, namely firm and stable democracy as well as rule of law.

For record, the pioneers of ombudsmanship (Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark, and New Zealand) are all high-income, stable democracies with a sound rule of law. Hence it goes without saying that in those countries the system is highly successful.

Be that as it may, it is highly advisable for the government to ensure that those two fundamental elements are firmly entrenched so much so the proposed ombudsman will be highly efficacious in attaining its desired goals and objectives.

The last thing people want is such an institution to be ended as a mere white elephant institution. After all a new law means a new budget hence a new burden to the government. Thus every single penny spent ought to produce the best results.

Law or legal institution alone would not be sufficient to create good governance. To have a solid and healthy legal institution, law cannot work in silos. Law and a sound political culture ought to be in sync.

Unfortunately, the nation has a bad track record. Despite having a law clearly prohibiting the act of political hopping, the nation is still infected with the culture of mandate betrayal.

It seems that until and unless our political culture is drastically changed, the creation of any new legislation would not be sufficient in providing an effective panacea to our political maladies.

Mohamed Hanipa Maidin is a former member of Parliament for Sepang, and a former deputy minister in the Prime Minister's Department (legal affairs).