Editorial

Security

Politics

World

Letters

Sports

Obituaries

Archives

by the Consumer Watch

In this week's, Consumer Ombudsman column, we temporarily deviate from the topics and areas of consumer concern that we have been highlighting in past few weeks and we report some important developments that will interest the consumer public.

The first such development is the appointment of a Tax Ombudsman for the first time in Sri Lanka. Former High Court judge Mr. Maxwell Parakrama Paranagama has been appointed as the Special Commissioner of Tax(popularly called Tax Ombudsman). Mr. Paranagama's last judicial appointment was as High Court judge in Anuradhapura.

The office of Tax Ombudsman is a government appointment approved by the Cabinet of Ministers and takes effect from 15th September 2005. The Tax Ombudsman will function from the Ministry of Finance. The appointment of such an Ombudsman was referred to in Finance Minister Amunugama's Budget Speech of November 2004 and we are happy that promise has been now implemented.

The Tax Ombudsman is entitled to grant relief towards Tax payers who suffer due to careless of unfair decisions taken by Tax Administrators and also ensure the transparency of Tax administration.

With the object of ensuring such transparency, the Tax Ombudsman's office is located at the Ministry of Finance - away from the Department of Inland Revenue.

Tax payers can complain to him about any injustice in relation to payment of income tax. Payee tax of even Value Added Tax (VAT).

The Ministry of Finance and Planning placed advertisements in all the newspapers informing the general public of the Tax Ombudsman's appointment, his powers and the details about his office, the type of complaints he can inquire into and Awards and Relief he can grant.

The advertisement states that the Ombudsman can inquire into complaints of any injustice arising in consequence of any maladministration on the part of any officer of the Department of Inland Revenue.

Maladministration in this context is defined to include:

(a) A decision, process, recommendation, act of commission or omission which appears to:

i. Be a departure from established practices;

ii. Be arbitrary, Unreasonable or discriminatory;

iii. Have been given on irrelevant grounds; or

iv. Involve the exercise of powers, or the failure of refusal to do so, for corrupt or improper motives or as administrative excesses.

(b) Neglect, inattention, delay incompetence, inefficiency and ineptitude in the administration or discharge of duties and responsibilities;

(c) Repeated notices, unnecessary attendance or prolonged hearing while deciding cases concerning:

i. Determination of income or value;

ii. Assessment of liability to taxes or levies administered by the Inland Revenue Department;

iii. Classification or valuation of goods;

iv. Settlement of claims of refunds or rebate; or

v. Determination of fiscal and tax concessions or exemptions;

(d) Willful errors in the determination of refunds or rebates;

(e) Deliberate withholding or non-payment of refunds or rebates already determined.

The above are very wide areas and we must applaud the Ministry of Finance for broadening the areas of complaint and the Commissioner General of Inland Revenue for having agreed to this broad terms of reference.

The way in which the Tax Ombudsman will inquire into complaints is as follows:

The complaint can be made -

i. directly made to him by the person aggrieved;

ii. in writing and addressed to the Tax Ombudsman;

iii. within a period of six (6) months from the date on which the complainant had first notice of the injustice complained of (The period may in appropriate circumstances be extended);

iv. Complaints which are false, frivolous or vaxatious or made anonymously or through any representative will not be entertained.

The awards and relief that the Ombudsman can grants is as follows:

The Ombudsman may, where he considers it appropriate to do so, conduct an inquiry into any complaint. Every such inquiry shall be held in private; the complainant is entitled to appear before it either in person or by a representative. On the conclusion of every inquiry the Ombudsman will submit a report to the Commissioner General of Inland Revenue, setting out his findings and recommendation.

Where the Ombudsman decides not to conduct an inquiry he will communicate such decision to the complainant together with the reasons therefore. Such communication shall be treated as the conclusion of such complaint. Every complaint with or without any inquiry being conducted should be dealt with to a finish within a period of ninety (90) days from the date on which the complaint is received.

With this appointment of the Tax Ombudsman, Sri Lanka can now boast of four Ombudsmen. The first was the parliamentary Ombudsman appointed by the Constitution itself; the second was the Financial Ombudsman appointed by the banking and financial industry; the third, the Insurance Ombudsman appointed by the insurance industry; and the fourth, the Tax Ombudsman appointed by the Ministry of Finance.

Both the Financial Ombudsman and the Insurance Ombudsman operate from the same building at No.143 A, Vajira Road, Colombo 5 which is fast becoming known as the "Ombudsman Mandiraya" (Ombudsman House). The National Consumer Watch of Sri Lanka also operates from this same building.

While civil society should welcome the appointment of the above Ombudsman and congratulate the State for encouraging the spread Ombudsman schemes, for some time there has been public agitation for appointment of Ombudsman to cover the Health sector, Electricity and Water.

All these three sectors are still to a large extent a monopoly of the State. The media carry reports of negligence and carelessness in our public hospitals and the Ministry for Health has recently recognized the value of an Ombudsman to inquire into such complaints - but no appointment has been made.

Electricity and Water bills have also sky-rocketed and in other countries there are Ombudsman to look into consumer/user complaints - even contesting an electricity or water bill. However in Sri Lanka if such bills are not paid the service is discontinued.

Here we should emphasise to the public that the current parliamentary Ombudsman - retired Court of Appeal Justice Mr. Ranjith Ranaraja already has the jurisdiction to inquire into any complaint relating to the health sector, the electricity and bills and charges of the Water Supply and Drainage Board.

This is because the Parliamentary Ombudsman has the right to investigate and report upon complaints of allegations of the infringement of fundamental rights and other injustices by public officers or public corporations, local authorities and other like institutions, in accordance with and subject to the provision of law.

The word 'injustice' is defined broadly in the legislation to include any injustice caused by any decisions/recommendation(including a recommendation to a Minister) or by any act or omission and the infringement of any right recognized by the constitution.

Accordingly, while we highly recommend the appointment of a Ombudsman to overlook such areas such as Health, Electricity and Water any current complaints relating to state sector public hospital and the Electricity and Water Board can be submitted to the Parliamentary Ombudsman for relief and redress.

The latest appointment of another type of Ombudsman is by Sri Lankan Airlines. In what may be considered a very novel approach, which in time to come may be emulated by other employers - SriLankan Airlines have appointed two external Ombudsman to overlook and grant redress in relation to any workplace harassment of their Airline employees. In actual fact, a committee has been appointed to cover the subject and two members of the committee are referred to as "External Ombudsman".

One of them is former distinguished public servant Mr. Bradman Weerakoon. The other is a lady lawyer - Mrs. Manoli Jinadasa. They have been designated as "External Ombudsman". Workplace harassment is fast becoming an employee grievance especially in the case of female employees and we should congratulate SriLankan Airlines on this initiative.

Hence to conclude this weeks' column, the Ombudsman schemes are indeed becoming popular essentially because the worth of such schemes are being appreciated. The modern Sri Lankan approach to Ombudsman is commendable and is a real improvement from the "Agony Aunt" of western countries and the "Dukganna Rala" of the palace of the Kandyan kings.

Readers are welcome to send in their comments and suggestions to the National Consumer Watch No.143 A, Vajira Road, Colombo 5.

www.ceylincoproperties.com

| News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security |
| Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries | Junior Observer |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager