A final matter that should be clarified is whether (and what kind of) judicial review is possible against the decision to remove an ombudsperson. Judicial review enhances the protection of the ombudsperson’s position, and hence its independence. Similarly, it is commendable to provide a clear regulation with adequate guarantees concerning both the grounds for and procedure of suspension. PART II Immunities The legislative Act should provide for immunities for the ombudsperson and persons acting on his/her behalf. It is common for legislative Acts of establishment to include immunity for the ombudsperson or persons acting on its behalf from criminal prosecution, and sometimes also from civil suit. Immunities are important to secure the independent status of the ombudsperson, even though there are several national pieces of legislations which do not contain a clause to this effect. The formulation can be general and/or can refer to the statements made in the exercise of the functions. In case of the general formulation, it tends to indicate that the ombudsperson may not be detained, searched or arrested for criminal offences or misdemeanors concerning an opinion expressed or act committed in the discharge of their duties, which is often supplemented by the proviso ‘unless in case of delicto flagrante’. Generally the immunity is not absolute but will apply in respect of anything done in the course of the ombudsperson’s statutory duties. However, in a number of jurisdictions, the immunity from prosecution is of a more limited nature, sometimes with legal action against the ombudsperson being possible with the prior consent of parliament or only by the chief public prosecutor. Immunity from civil litigation is less common, and would be unreasonable if such immunity could in any way be used to avoid certain commercial contractual obligations or obligations under employment, health and safety and other such legislation. To the extent that the ombudsman institution is involved in investigating complaints, and reporting to parliament and the public on such activities, it is advisable to provide some immunity from defamation laws for information supplied or documentation produced in good faith in the exercise of any power, duty or function of the ombudsman, not only to the ombudsman institution, but also to complainants, and the press, which reports on the complaints and their outcomes. This encourages full dissemination of information, for example from witnesses, without fear of legal proceedings. 48