Ethical Review Process

Challenging the Decisions of Ethics Committees

There are various forms of challenge available to you as a researcher where you are unhappy with the conduct or decisions of a health and disability ethics committee.

• Complaint
• Second opinion
• Review of decision-making process

Complaint

You can complain about the administration or decisions of a health and disability ethics committee to the National Co-ordinator [8.0] or the committee Administrator.

All health and disability ethics committees are required to have procedures in place for resolving complaints.

It is suggested that complaint be your first avenue of challenge in all cases, as many issues will be able to be resolved through this process.

Second opinion

If an ethics committee declines to approve your research application, you are able to ask for a second opinion from the Health Research Council Ethics Committee (HRCEC) (www.hrc.govt.nz).

The second opinion process involves your application being reconsidered by the HRCEC, which then delivers its opinion to the health and disability ethics committee that made the original decision.

The health and disability ethics committee is then required to either agree with the HRCEC or explain why not. In this process, the final decision remains with the health and disability ethics committee that made the original decision.

Review of decision-making process

Health and disability ethics committees are public administrative bodies. You are therefore able to ask for a review of the process by which an ethics committee reviewed your application to ensure that the process complied with the principles of natural justice.

A process review would generally be requested only in the most serious circumstances.

You may request a process review from the Office of the Ombudsmen (www.ombudsmen.govt.nz) or from a judge of the High Court of New Zealand (www.justice.govt.nz), in which case the review is called a judicial review.

Page last updated: 13 December 2007