The Tasmania Law Reform Institute has requested the government improve how its decisions can be challenged by the public and reviewed by courts.
The Judicial Review Act was established to allow for a review process of government decisions and actions with the intention to provide legal safeguards for public accountability.
Dylan Richards from the institute said the system for judicial reviews was too complex, even for lawyers.
He said this made the process inaccessible and costly to use.
"When it originated 20 years ago, the Judicial Review Act was intended to simplify the process, making it more accessible to the general public," Mr Richards said.
"Subsequent developments in the law have effectively defeated this purpose."
He said community members and the legal fraternity in recent years had raised concerns that changes to legislation and government practice had undermined the objectives of the act.
"It is vital that the people have a means to ensure transparency on the part of the government and judicial review is an important tool to achieve this," he said.
The report identified the transfer of public decision-making to private bodies as an issue as there was no recourse to judicial review.
It said governments have become increasingly more reliant on powers conferred by contracts and other agreements to implement programs and control service delivery which were not subject to judicial review.
"Governments are also tending to outsource service delivery to a greater extent than they have in the past," the report said.
"If they are not so subject, there is no way of ensuring that the government and its servants and agents are not exceeding their legal powers.
"Individuals who are adversely affected by these decisions should have some recourse to an independent procedure for resolving their complaints."
The report recommended nine actions for reform.