The Ombudsman, Joseph Said Pullicino, enjoys a high trust rating. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi

Nearly everyone believes that the public administration should be subject to investigation by an autonomous institution and that it should be the Ombudsman who should investigate.

These findings – at 97 per cent and 93 per cent respectively of the people interviewed – emerged in a survey carried out by the Office of the Ombudsman.

The results were included in the Ombudsplan 2016 presented yesterday by the Ombudsman, Joseph Said Pullicino, to Anġlu Farrugia, the Speaker of Parliament.

Two years ago, in a debate about the Ombudsplan 2014, minister Helena Dalli said there was scope for significant improvement in public awareness and trust in the Ombudsman’s Office.

In fact the latest survey found that the Office, celebrating its 20th anniversary next month, enjoys one of the country’s highest institutional trust ratings, at 8.11 out of 10.

Also, 70 per cent of the population have heard of the Ombudsman and 90 per cent consider they know what his role is, including investigation of injustices. The same number are aware that the Ombudsman is independent of government.

Ombudsplan 2016 also gives an account of the services the Office has provided this year.

It registered a nearly 12 per cent rise in complaints received during the first eight months compared to the same period in 2014, receiving 402 more. This was the second consecutive increase, reversing an earlier downward trend.

The Ombudsman himself dealt with 272 cases and the remaining were handled by the Environment and Planning Commissioner (51), the Health Commissioner (44) and the Education Commissioner (35).

The most common complaint, 71 of them, related to the perceived lack of fairness in decisions made by the public administration, a 26 per cent increase over last year. Among the complaints received by the Environment and Planning Commissioner, the most common related to actions claimed to have been against the law or contrary to a strict application of the rules.

Nearly half the complaints handled by the Health Commissioner related to issues raised by or against healthcare employees. Nearly half the Education Commissioner’s cases were to do with claims of unjust or discriminatory treatment.

The Ombudsplan 2016 also contains a users’ survey, based on a sample of 250 of the Ombudsman’s clients over the last five years.

Nearly nine in 10 were positive about the service they received and six in 10 were happy with how their cases were handled, the assistance they got and the updates they received during the investigation.

Over half were satisfied with the Ombudsman’s conclusions and more than eight in 10 confirmed their willingness to make use of his services again if necessary.

The Ombudsman also studied two issues in depth, namely the grievances boards and freedom of information. He stressed the importance that bodies investigating alleged injustices be autonomous and independent, function in a transparent manner and apply known rules uniformly.

The Ombudsman said he was against the Opposition’s exercise of registering claims of injustice while promising an investigation once in government.

Considering the existing independent and autonomous entities dealing with such cases, he recommended that political parties agree not to set up such boards on a change in administration.

The public administration did not seem to be acknowledging the citizen’s right to be informed, he added. It was not acceptable to refuse to give information claiming it is commercially sensitive or confidential.

Effective freedom of information contributed significantly towards keeping corruption in check, he pointed out.

He recommended the exploration of mechanisms that would allow Parliament, the Leader of the Opposition and civil society to be informed, under confidential cover, of matters that were legitimately confidential.

Should the public administration be subject to scrutiny by an autonomous institution?

Should the Ombudsman be the institution to investigate the public administration?

Why did you approach the Ombudsman?