A foreign prisoner held at the forensic wing of the CCF at Mount Carmel Hospital committed suicide there on January 9. An inquiry was launched into the circumstances of his death and of the suicide watch regime in place. The incident followed two similar deaths in custody at the police ‘lock-up’ in Floriana over the previous weeks.

In announcing the inquiry, the Minister for Home Affairs and National Security said in Parliament the board he had established was to report its findings within a matter of 10 days. Taking the minister at his word, it was therefore expected that the inquiry would have been concluded by January 21, four weeks ago. Questions sent by this newspaper to the ministry asking whether the inquiry had been concluded elicited no reply but when ‘doorstepped’ last Friday, the minister said the report findings had been submitted on time.

However, he made it clear the report would not be published. “I will be willing to give information resulting from the internal inquiry, though not release the whole report, after seeking advice,” he told this newspaper.

Furthermore, this would not happen before the magisterial inquiry into the suicide is concluded.

There are a number of disturbing aspects to this case that could justifiably give rise to public cause for concern. Thus, the minister’s decision not to release the internal inquiry report in full is likely to fuel unnecessary speculation.

The minister says he will let the public know what the inquiry has found. Which means it is he who will be deciding what the public should and should not know. Surely, the minister realises that the nature of the case and the place where the death occurred demand full transparency and accountability.

The death, it bears repeating, occurred in the forensic wing of Mount Carmel Hospital, a notoriously ill-funded and poorly-staffed organisation.

There are therefore issues of considerable public interest at stake with regard to the outcome of this inquiry. Saying nothing would have been the worst option for the minister. Deciding what to reveal and what to keep confidential at best exposes him to accusations of managing the information.

The minister is politically accountable for what goes on in the departments falling under his wing. Transparency and accountability are vital to the nuts and bolts of good government administration. This means having the right procedures in place for good day-to-day administration of the regular business of government. It includes ensuring good media and community relations, especially on delicate issues.

The need for independent journalists, free comment and access to information are today accepted by all politicians and administrators in thriving democracies throughout the world. The role of journalism is to hold politicians and officialdom to account. We need more, not less, of this in a healthy democracy.

The absolute test of good journalism is that the story should be in the public interest, exposing a serious misdemeanour and preventing the public from being misled by some statement or action of an individual, a ministry or organisation.

A matter – such as suicides in prison or deaths in custody – is in the public interest because the public has the right to know, in the service of fairness and openness as part of a democracy, if it is being deceived. This sort of public accountability is a must if we want to preserve an open society and the government must promote it in practice.