Along with the rising cost of living, and a scandal here and there, the country’s institutions will undoubtedly be one of the key issues in the upcoming general election.

The institutions have been bandied about by both political parties, each accusing the other of hijacking these entities for nefarious purposes.

In the end, the criticism of these important offices only serves to undermine public trust in institutions that serve a very important role in a democracy.

But the issue is not that simple and the institutions cannot simply be placed into one category.

There are those institutions that have the legal authority to investigate and prosecute, then there are those that have the role of acting as watchdogs over the government and MPs, but who have little power and can only make recommendations.

Oftentimes, the political parties do not make this distinction when criticising the “institutions”. Their tactics and targets differ, however.

The Labour Party often attacks the second group of institutions, like the NAO, the Ombudsman and the Standards Commissioner. It criticises these entities for doing their job and highlighting bad governance, breaches of ethics and cases of corruption.

The PN, on the other hand, focuses more on the Police, the FIAU and the MFSA. It criticises their “lack of action” on fighting bad governance, breaches of ethics and cases of corruption.

In some cases, the criticism is justified. In others, it is not, or perhaps things are taken too far.

Just this week, government Whip Glenn Bedingfield launched a scathing attack on most of the country’s institutions, claiming that they have become the “de facto Opposition” and accusing them of attacking Labour just because it is Labour.

He was referring to the Standards Commissioner – a frequent target of his – as well as the Ombudsman and the NAO. But he criticised the Courts and the Police too, saying that they were “persecuting” Joseph Muscat after they raided his Burmarrad home.

His boss, Prime Minister Robert Abela, who only hours earlier said government had full trust in the institutions, did not chastise Bedingfield. Instead, he defended the MP by saying he had expressed his personal opinion.

But then again Abela had himself, a few days earlier, issued a veiled threat against the Courts, implying that the inquiring magistrate had exceeded her power when she ordered that the Police confiscate the mobile phones belonging to Muscat’s 14-year-old daughters.

In a subtle warning, Abela said the institutions must return the trust placed in them by the administration.

But if Abela’s comments were subtle, Bedingfield’s were not.

Perhaps the Labour MP needs someone to explain to him that the very role of these institutions is to keep the administration in check and hold it accountable. The very nature of their role is to be critical, to find wrongdoings and point them out. It is then the government’s duty to fix these problems.

Just because the NAO, the Ombudsman and Standards Commissioner criticise the government does not make them the opposition. It means they are doing their job. It also means that government isn’t performing as well as it should.

Government is currently also undermining the Ombudsman’s office, with the head of the civil service engaging in a drawn-out spat with the constitutionally appointed official over the issue of persons of trust.

Mario Cutajar took issue with the Ombudsman’s criticism of the government’s excessive spending on persons of trust and accused him of doing the same thing, something which the latter has rejected outright.

Then, this week we found out, through a PQ, that 29 out of 30 people forming part of the Deputy Prime Minister’s private secretariat are persons of trust. Perhaps Cutajar will now admit the Ombudsman was right.

The PN, on the other hand, often criticises the Police, the AG, the FIAU and the MFSA for “failure to act”.

This criticism was fully justified up until a few years ago, when the regulatory bodies did next to nothing to combat money laundering and the police force was led by puppets.

But the PN should acknowledge that a lot of progress has been made, particularly in the field of financial crime. It should also acknowledge that the police force today is not the same police force of eight years ago.

While it is true that certain high-profile investigations have not even started, the party knows that prosecuting individuals, who had years to cover up their tracks, is not an easy thing to do and the Police need a solid case to be able to prosecute. If anything, over the past few months we have seen some progress, which is more than can be said for previous years and previous police chiefs.

The political parties need to realise that when they say the institutions are hijacked by their political rivals, it is like they’re saying that everyone within that institution is failing to do their duty or that everyone is reporting for work not to serve the country but rather to serve their political masters.

Such comments can be highly demotivating for all the honest and integrous employees whose sole interest is to uphold the principles of justice, security and good governance.

This is something the parties should keep in mind when proclaiming that the institutions should be allowed to work freely.