The Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary the three most important arms of government. The role of each is, in theory, clearly defined and each acts as a check upon the other.

The Executive carries out the day-to-day running of the state. It puts into place the legislation mandated by the Legislature. It monitors standards, distributes benefits and commissions infrastructure. It is not party political, even if headed by members of the ruling party. Ministers give the lead on how their ministries should be run, how policy is to be implemented. They are not, naturally, expected to handle every detail of the running of the country.

And among the myriad staff employed, there is usually a small office, Jabatan Perhubungan Awam, the public relations office. Yet, I have to admit, I am completely confused as to the function of this office.

Win-win situation

A couple of years ago, I worked for an online employment magazine in the United Kingdom. I was constantly in contact with PR officers for various government agencies. Some of the information I was after could be considered sensitive: jobs lost, discrimination against ethnic minorities, allegations of inefficient use of public funds (particularly regarding employment policy in the health service).

Yet never once was I referred to a higher official. The PR officer would take down my number, ask when my deadline was, and then call me back well within the allotted time frame. Sometimes I had difficulty getting through to the PRO (the Metropolitan police, for example, were a nightmare), but they were generally available, even after office hours: The phones would give you the mobile number of the officer on duty.

They are not trusted with making government policy. They will not give their own opinion. But they are well-briefed on what policy is. They have the statistics to show what has been happening in their department. If they don't know, they find out. And call you back.

This was, undoubtedly, a win-win situation. I got the official response, speedily. I could incorporate the government view into my story. If I needed further information, it was supplied. The public were given assurances that their officials were doing their job, or information with which to question official policy.

Malaysian situation

Now, let's flash back to Malaysia.

Once you have found the relevant public relations officer, they are unable to comment or give you further information. They are unable to elucidate official policies. They automatically refer the reporter to the minister.

The minister, of course, is not aware of everything that happens in the department. During a press conference, there are 'hot' issues that all reporters want discussed. Other issues, equally important, but less timely, often get pushed aside, or the minister says he (or she) doesn't (unsurprisingly) have the information at hand.

Information is hidden, not through malice or policy, but through the lack of channels for disbursing it.

Worse yet, there have been instances where departmental officials have openly scoffed at NGO activists for having believed statistics from a minister, reported in the press. The implication was not that the minister was wittingly lying to the public, but that he would have been badly briefed.

A problem for everyone

The problem is not merely one for reporters. It is a problem for everyone.

The public is getting inaccurate information. Information is being denied through incompetence and inefficiency. This leads to a distorted picture of not just government policy, but other vital aspects of our daily lives (water quality, pollution, prices, etc.).

There is no private or government conspiracy here to defraud the public. The result, however, is much the same.

SONIA RANDHAWA is a senior writer with Radiqradio, an independent radio-based news provider.