North-West Public Independent Conciliator Shares Best Practices In Ghana
A two-member team; Madam Nina Ambuban – Research no. 5 and Mr Ngodgi Rais – Executive Officer no.1 of the Office of the Public Independent Conciliator (OPIC) of the North West Region
A two-member team from the Office of the Public Independent Conciliator (OPIC) of the North West Region visited the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice in Ghana (CHRAJ) for Bench marking.
The duo from Cameroon’s North-West Region were received by the Commissioner of Ghana’s CHRAJ, Mr. Joseph Whittal along with Two Deputy Commissioners, Mr. Benjamin Barfo Bonney and Madam Mercy Larbi.
The five-day visit took place from the 29th of September 2025 to the 3rd of October 2025 with the purpose to benchmark CHRAJ’s complaint management system and identify best practices, with a view to adapt same and improve the OPIC’s complaints and investigations management system. It was also necessary to identify potential avenues for formal collaboration between the two Ombudsman institutions.
The OPIC team had as expectation to explore potential areas for joint projects and initiatives focusing on institutional capacity and mandate areas, complaint management, investigation procedures, research and public education and also make recommendations to ensure institutional and operational efficiency and standards.
The bench marking sessions covered various topics including the set up and legal framework of both institutions, their functions and procedures. Facilitation was mainly done through PowerPoint presentations followed by plenary discussions on the key issues, identifying similarities and differences/gaps and recommending best practices as well as areas for future collaboration.
Presentations covered the following topics:
1. Overview of CHRAJ,
2. The Office of the Public Independent Conciliator (OPIC), Creation, Organization and Functioning,
3. The Administrative Justice mandate of CHRAJ,
4. The Human Rights mandate,
5. The Anti- Corruption mandate,
6. Case Management, CHRAJ (CI 67) and
7. The role of the Research Department.
8. Overview of CHRAJ.
The sessions were interactive as the facilitators ensured that knowledge was not only disseminated but accurately perceived and understood by the OPIC team and CHRAJ staff. To ensure this, facilitators engaged participants in discussions and kept the sessions open for feedback, questions and suggestions.
The bench marking exercise revealed several key similarities:
1. Legislative framework: Both institutions are duly set up and recognized by law and enjoy legal protection in the implementation of their functions.
2. Mandates: Both institutions have similar mandates to investigate complaints, promote administrative justice, and enforce ethical obligations.
3. Complaint Management Systems: Both institutions have a system for numbering, filing, and indexing complaints.
4. Mediation: Both institutions recognize mediation as an important tool for settling complaints.
5. Fair hearing: Both respect the principle of natural justice and fair hearing, and allow complainants to choose mediators.
6. Negotiated Settlements: Both institutions recognize and enforce negotiated settlements.
7. Enforcement of decisions: Both have the capacity to enforce their decisions.
8. Reporting Requirements: Both produce statistical reports, monthly, and quarterly which are factored into an annual report.
9. Investigative Powers: Both have the power to request documents and attendance of persons.
10. Independence: Both are independent bodies that emphasize the importance of independence and impartiality.
11. Free Services: Both offer free services to the public.
Recommendations
1. Share Best Practices: CHRAJ and OPIC should share expertise in complaint handling and investigations.
2. Capacity Building: Collaborative training programs for staff would enhance skills and knowledge.
3. Information Exchange: Regular exchange of information and experiences on promoting administrative justice and human rights.
4. Court Enforcement: OPIC should consider adopting court enforcement mechanisms to strengthen its complaint handling process.
5. Resource Mobilization: Both institutions should push towards timely release of funds by government for its work to enhance efficiency.
The Commission of Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) is a creation of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana and established in 1993 by its enabling legislation, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) Act, 1993 (Act 456).
It serves at the National Human Rights institution (NHRI which promotes and protects fundamental human rights and freedoms of all persons in Ghana). The public Services Ombudsman (Administrative Justice) exists to check maladministration in Public Service and Anti-Corruption Agency and Ethics Office for the public sector, to check corruption amongst civil servants and public officials in Ghana.
The bench marking visit to CHRAJ offered a valuable experience for the OPIC to compare the two institutions and identify gaps in the OPIC’s operations, learn from CHRAJ’s best practices and institute measures to improve their capacity in complaint handling and investigations as well as explore potential areas for collaboration. It will further assist the OPIC to set clear strategic goals and develop Key Performance Indicators towards an improved public service.
The visit also provided opportunity for both institutions to share experiences and learn from each other. Notably, CHRAJ was observed that the OPIC has an effective public education system in place which minimizes the number of complaints received.