Following a spate of disturbing events in the Corradino Correctional Facility - the resignation of the prison director, preceded by the resignation of the chairman of the prison board; revelations in the media about a notorious prisoner apparently running the show behind bars as an intermediary between prisoners and the director; and others - the Minister for Justice and Home Affairs found himself compelled to institute an inquiry into the state of the prison.

That inquiry, led by Emmanuel Cassar, a former director of the prison, Mary-Anne Agius and Martin Scicluna, has now reported. They are to be congratulated on what appears to be a most thorough report. It makes disturbing reading. Or, rather, the limited part of the report that has been released, makes for uncomfortable reading. For reasons which are not immediately apparent, only the recommendations of the report have been published. In what we often boast of as a thriving democracy, this is utterly unacceptable.

Transparency and accountability require that a report of this seriousness, examining an area of justice that is so fundamental to a civilised society, is laid before the House of Representatives, debated and exposed to public scrutiny. It would be unacceptable, unwarranted and totally unnecessary for the government to be seen as if it is trying to cover up the findings of an inquiry, which was sparked off in the first place by public concern about what was going on in the prison.

A report saying that, in the light of the maladministration and mismanagement identified in the inquiry, the authorities should be invited to consider taking administrative or disciplinary action against those responsible, demands to be exposed to further parliamentary and public scrutiny and not be buried behind an official statement, however extensive that may have been. It is most definitely in the public interest that the taxpayer should know what has been going on. If the report makes grisly reading, all the more reason why such shortcomings should be exposed to ensure they are tackled with the seriousness they deserve.

One can begin to guess at what is in the body of the report. Recommendations like: "A clear chain of command should be put in place"; "Responsibility and accountability at every level should be clearly laid down" and "The quality, selection and training of the overwhelming majority of staff should be improved" clearly imply that the prison is bereft of good leadership or management at all levels.

"Determined steps to end the current drug culture must urgently be taken" indicates not only that a drug culture in prison exists but that the steps to overcome such a culture were not being taken. "There should be a policy of zero tolerance to drugs... underpinned by organisational improvements to the way the battle against drugs is conducted" speaks volumes about what has been going on or, rather, what has not been happening in this regard.

These and many other parts of the report indicate clearly that the organisation is weak, badly run, ill-led, demoralised, under-resourced and that its own rules (for example over the granting of leave and financial accountability) and discipline are daily being abused.

It is unhealthy to have to guess what the recommendations are saying about the state of the prison. In a mature democracy, the government should not hide any facts from the public simply because they may be embarrassing. The prison is too important for that.