COMMUNICATION BETWEEN STATE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR PUBLICS: A
STUDY OF THE COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE
JUSTICE (CHRAJ)
BY
RICHARD AMOAKO ANSONG
(10163822)
DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON, IN
PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARDOF
MASTER OF ARTS DEGREE IN COMMUNICATION STUDIES
OCTOBER, 2013
DECLARATION
I, Richard Amoako Ansong, declare that except for the works of other authors duly
referenced, the work presented in this dissertation was done by me, under the supervision of
Dr Margaret Amoakohene. I further affirm that this work has not been submitted either in
part or whole to any other educational institution for the award of any degree, diploma or
certificate.
………………………… ………………………….
Dr Margaret Amoakohene Richard AmoakoAnsong
(Supervisor) (Student)
Date …………………….. Date …………………….
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my mother, Madam Alice Asantewah, whose toil and sacrifices
have brought me this far, and also to the Commissioner of CHRAJ, Madam Lauretta Vivian
Lamptey, for her immeasurable support and encouragement while this dissertation was being
written.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to God for giving me the strength and wisdom to carry
out this research. To Him be the glory for the great work he has done in my life.
I am highly indebted to my supervisor, Dr Margaret Amoakohene, for her motherly guidance
during the period of this research. Auntie Maggie, I am most grateful for your time spent on
this work. I am equally grateful to Prof. Audrey Gadzekpo, for her encouragement and useful
suggestions during the entire period of writing this dissertation. To other lecturers of the
School of Communication Studies, University of Ghana, I say a big thank you for the great
knowledge you have imparted in me.
I would also like to thank the Commissioners of CHRAJ for granting me the permission to
undertake this study. To all my siblings, course mates, and all other persons who contributed
in diverse ways towards the success of this dissertation, I say thank you and may God bless
you all.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
Decla
ration ………………………………………………………………………… .i
Dedication ………………………………………………………………………….. ii
Acknowledgement …………………………………………………………………. iii
Table of Contents..…………………………………………………………………. iv
List of Charts………………………………………………………………………...vii
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………..viii
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study.……………………………………………………… ...1
1.2 National Human Rights Institutions…………………………………………… ...5
1.3 The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice……………… ...7
1.4 Problem statement and Research Questions.…………………………………….10
1.5 Objectives………………………………………………………………………..12
1.6 Significance of the study………………………………………………………...12
1.7 Operational Definitions………………………………………………………….13
1.8 Summary…………………………………………………………………………13
iv
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….14
2.2 Theoretical framework……………………………………………………….14
2.3 Systems Theory………………………………………………………………14
2.4 Limitations of the Systems Theory…………………………………………..17
2.5 Media Richness Theory……………………………………………………...18
2.6 Limitations of Media Richness Theory……………………………………...19
2.7 Related Works…..……………………………………………………………20
2.8 Summary……………………………………………………………………..27
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………….28
3.2 Research Design……………………………………………………………..28
3.3 Population and Sample Size…………………………………………………29
3.4 Sampling Technique and Procedure…………………………………………29
3.5 Data Collection Instrument and Procedure…………………………………..30
3.6 Data Analysis and Presentation……………………………………………...31
3.7 Summary……………………………………………………………………..31
v
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..32
4.2 Accessing Information….…………………………………………………….32
4.3 Communication Channels…………………………………………………….34
4.4 Preferred Medium….........................................................................................35
4.5 Communication Timeframe…………………………………………………...36
4.6 Service Delivery and its rating…..……………………………………………37
4.7 Filing Complaints……………………………………………………………..39
4.8. Feedback……………………………………………………………………..40
4.9 Complaint Accessibility………………………………………………………40
4.10 Public Education…………………………………………………………….42
4.11 Discussions…………………………………………………………………..43
4.12 Summary…………………………………………………………………….49
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction …………………………………………………………………..50
5.2 Summary of Findings…………………………………………………………50
5.3 Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………...51
5.4 Recommendations…………………………………………………………….52
5.8 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….54
vi
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………55
APPENDIX 1……………………………………………………………………...59
LIST OF CHARTS
CHARTS PAGE
A. How often complainants accessed information from CHRAJ……………….33
B. Where respondents first heard about CHRAJ………………………………..34
C. How often respondents wanted to hear from CHRAJ……………………….36
D. How respondents rate the services of CHRAJ.……………………………….40
E. How respondents access information on their complaints……………………43
F. Crosstab of access to information and service ratings………………………..50
vii
ABSTRACT
This study investigated how state institutions in Ghana communicate with their publics, using
the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) as a reference point.
In a survey, the researcher sampled 150 respondents, comprising 100 respondents from the
Ministries, Departments, and Agencies, with the other 50 made up of persons who had filed
complaints with the Commission at its head office in Accra.
Underpinned by the media richness and systems theories, the study revealed that CHRAJ had
been communicating with its external publics using mainly the traditional media, with radio
being the most dominant and preferred medium. The study also found that the Commission
had feedback mechanisms (such as letters, visits, and telephone) in place to allow its external
publics, especially complainants, to keep abreast of happenings within the Commission. The
results also gave an indication that the Commission had been practising an open system, as
the various communication channels allowed the external publics to access information
without much difficulty. The Commission was, therefore, rated highly by its external publics.
iix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study
Communication is a very vital ingredient for creating and sustaining relationships between
institutions and their publics. It is, therefore, not surprising that some scholars have rightly
described it as “the nervous system” or the “life-blood” of any human social action (Sambe,
2009). Communication is deemed excellent when it assures the achievement of organisational
effectiveness, by helping to match organisational goals with the expectations of its strategic
constituents. Without communication structures and processes which enable the two-way
exchange of information between institutions and their publics, it is difficult to imagine how
institutions can be responsive to public needs and expectations (Grunig, 1992).
Haider, Mcloughlin & Scott (2011) note that a key aspect of governance is how citizens,
leaders, and public institutions relate to each other in order to make change happen.
Importantly, two-way communication allows an institution’s publics to monitor its activities,
to enter into dialogue with the institution on issues that matter to them, and to influence
policy outcomes. This also encourages the development of trust between institutions and their
publics, and forms the foundation of legitimacy for institutions over the long-term. Haider et
al (2011) also observe that on a practical level, communication can be seen as essential to the
development of an institution’s capability, accountability and responsiveness in the following
ways:
• Capability: Consultation and dialogue between institutions and their publics can, in
1
principle, improve public understanding of, and support for, policies which may be initiated
by such institutions and encourage public ownership of reform. Without the support of the
public, institutions often lack the capability to get things done.
• Accountability: Access to information and transparency are in theory vital for enabling
citizens to monitor and hold institutions to account for their actions and inactions. There is
significant evidence that transparency can reduce opportunities for corruption.
• Responsiveness: A well-informed public strengthens the demand for institutions to be
accountable. For example, debate through the media, public information campaigns, and
social accountability mechanisms have all worked to encourage institutions to be responsive
to demands of the public and resulted in better public service delivery.
Panos (2007), nevertheless, makes the point that in order to impact on governance outcomes,
public officials need to be willing to be influenced by public opinion. He posits that in
practice, the line between sophisticated communication which seeks to ‘manufacture’
consent, and genuine consultation, which shows a willingness to engage people and possibly
change plans based on their input, can often be blurred. In such contexts, communication can
potentially play a crucial role in managing expectations, building trust in, and oversight of,
state institutions, aiding the formation of an inclusive national identity and fostering an
engaged and participatory citizenry. Moore (1995) also prescribes strategic communication
which, according to him, is designed to advance particular policies or organisational
strategies by making them comprehensible and by enlisting the support and cooperation of
those who must work together to produce the intended result. He notes, in particular, that
strategic communication raises the ante for communication— which goes beyond raising
awareness to using communication to assist stakeholders or clients in learning new
2
information and developing new attitudes to facilitate adoption of new behaviours (Moore,
1995).
For Canel (2007), an institution’s message is both an abstract and specific definition of what
the institution is. He believes that through the message, an idea is transmitted about the
institution; and about who runs it, and the public activity it carries out. Therefore, he advises
public institutions to put out messages that cause their recipients to trust in their institutions,
that justify their existence and that transmit the good work they do. Canel concurs with
Moore on the need for a communication strategy, and notes that the communication strategy
of a public institution can be focused in different ways:
• Communication that serves the strategic aims of the organisation: Here, communication
comes behind strategy, and communicators’ involvement in decision making is very limited.
Communication gets involved once the policy decision has been taken to facilitate its
application.
• Communication at the centre of the organisation’s strategy: This entails the person in charge
of communication, together with the rest of the directors, deciding on the public policy that
best defines the identity of the institution (Canel, 2007, pp. 79-80).
Pollitt and Summa (1997) also wade into the discussion about the need for institutions to
communicate by introducing the concept of ethos. They note that their [institutions] ethos is
identified through the definition they make of themselves and their role, their description of
aims, and their interest to those they serve, the qualities they ascribe to themselves and to
their work when they project a public image as experts in their field. Clearly, an institution’s
message should, therefore, respond to questions such as: Who are we? What is our mission?
3
What qualities do we have? Erbiti (2003) takes cognizance of these questions and
recommends that the department in charge of communication in an institution should handle
all incoming, outgoing, and internal messages. He, however, cautions that the effectiveness of
this will depend on the department’s direct relationship with the heads of the institution, on
its position at the centre of the institution’s structure, and on the communication skills of
those who belong to it. Barret (2000) also notes that communication gives credibility to state
institutions, and only if they are credible, relevant, and indispensable to their various users
will they be capable of successfully facing the future.
Having established the importance of communication for state institutions, Bennett and
Jessani (2011) are of the opinion that the choice of one channel over another or the use of
several channels will depend on the kind of message, its content, available resources, and
how the audience likes to receive the information. However, Dye (2009) reveals several key
factors institutions should bear in mind when dealing with the media if they wish to
maximize the impact of their work. First, they should be accessible, prompt, honest, helpful,
and reliable; second, they should understand the culture of the media community; and finally,
they should be aware of the different types of journalists around—sensationalist, ideologist,
well-informed pack followers, columnists, or commentators and community journalists. Their
handling of news will obviously be different. Be that as it may, Erbiti (2003) posits that lack
of communication gives the impression of a dull, gloomy institution with little known about
it, whose worth is debatable and whose existence could be called into question.
1.2 National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs)
For National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), communication becomes inevitable
considering the pivotal role they play in the development of every nation, as they serve to
4
promote and protect the fundamental human rights and freedoms of citizens. Indeed, the
principal source of normative standards for NHRIs, the Paris Principles, adopted in 1991
provides that for national institutions to be effective in meeting the ideals for which they were
created, they should be established by the national constitution that clearly sets out their role
and powers and that their mandate should be as broad as possible (International Council on
Human Rights Policy, 2005).
The Paris Principles state, among other things, that national institutions should be pluralist
and should co-operate with a range of social and political groups and institutions, including
non-governmental organisations (NGOs), judicial institutions, professional bodies and
government departments. They also enjoin NHRIs to make recommendations and proposals
to governments on various matters in respect of human rights, including proposed and
existing laws, human rights violations, and the national human rights situation in general.
They, particularly, require national institutions to promote teaching and research on human
rights and organise public awareness and educational programmes (International Council on
Human Rights Policy, 2005).
For institutions with quasi jurisdictional functions - those that receive and handle complaints
of human rights violations from members of the public – they are to inform petitioners or
complainants of their rights, available remedies, and to promote access to them. They are also
to hear complaints, transmit, and make appropriate recommendations to competent authorities
for redress. According to the International Council on Human Rights Policy’s 2005 report,
national institutions tend to be more effective when they enjoy public legitimacy. The report
further elucidates that national institutions are able to win public legitimacy when they are
seen to stand up for the rights of the powerless against powerful interests, and act fairly in
dealing with issues that fall within their domain.
5
Perhaps, an even greater source of effectiveness for national institutions, as captured by the
report, is found in their ability to make their services as accessible to the public as possible.
National institutions are expected to make known what they do, and how they can be
contacted, to the public and non-governmental bodies. Their offices should be accessible,
especially to socially disadvantaged groups and other vulnerable persons in the population.
Furthermore, national human rights institutions are expected to have an open organisational
culture, one that assures the public and partner organisations of their willingness and
readiness to welcome and address the concerns the public might have. Organisations that are
open, collaborative and self-critical are thought to be far more likely to respond well to the
needs of the public and to identify shortcomings in their practice.
In addition, national institutions with mandate to receive and handle complaints from
members of the public are expected to handle those complaints speedily and effectively.
Their procedures are to be simple, accessible, affordable and speedy. Communication is,
thus, very vital to the work of national human rights institutions, as it serves as the conduit
through which they reach out to their publics as regards the effective discharge of their
mandates. Therefore, how this communication is carried out between these institutions and
their publics portends to a large extent whether those institutions will succeed or fail in their
duties.
1.3 The Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ)
Ghana is not only touted as a model of democracy on the African continent but is also
acclaimed to be among the best in terms of respecting and upholding the fundamental human
rights and freedoms of individuals. Chapter five of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of
6
Ghana guarantees the fundamental human rights and freedoms of all persons in Ghana.
Pursuant to this, the Constitution also devotes chapter 18 to the setting up of the Commission
on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) to promote and protect the
fundamental human rights and freedoms of all persons in Ghana. Consequently, Parliament
passed Act 456 in 1993, establishing the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative
Justice (CHRAJ). The Commission has a three-fold mandate: a national human rights
institution, ombudsman, and an anti-corruption agency. Article 218 (f) of the Constitution
also gives the Commission the mandate to educate the public on their fundamental human
rights and freedoms.
The functions of the Commission, as captured in Article 218 of the 1992 Constitution, are the
duty to:
a) “Investigate complaints of violations of fundamental rights and freedoms,
injustice, corruption, abuse of power and unfair treatment of any person by a
public officer in the exercise of his official duties;
b) Investigate complaints concerning the functioning of the Public Services
Commission, the administrative organs of the state, the Armed Forces, the
Police Service and the Prisons Service in so far as complaints relate to the
failure to achieve a balanced structuring of those services or equal access by
all to the recruitment of those services or fair administration in relation to
those services;
c) Investigate complaints concerning practices and actions by persons, private
enterprises and other institutions where those complaints allege violations of
fundamental rights and freedoms under the Constitution;
7
d) Take appropriate action to call for the remedying, correction and reversal of
instances specified in paragraph (a), (b), and (c) of this clause through such
means as are fair, proper and effective, including –
I. Negotiation and compromise between the parties concerned;
II. Causing the complaint and its finding on it to be reported to the
superior of an offending person;
III. Bringing proceedings in a competent court for a remedy to ensure the
termination of the offending action or conduct, or the abandonment or
alteration of the offending procedures; and
IV. Bringing proceedings to restrain the enforcement of such legislation or
regulation by challenging its validity if the offending action or conduct
is sought to be justified by subordinate legislation or regulation which
is unreasonable or otherwise ultra vires.
e) Investigate all instances of alleged or suspected corruption and the
misappropriation of public moneys by officials and to take appropriate steps,
including report to the Attorney-General, and the Auditor-General, resulting
from such investigations;
f) Educate the public as to human rights and freedoms by such means as the
Commissioner may decide, including publications, lectures and symposia; and
g) Report annually to Parliament on the performance of its functions.”
The Constitution also makes the Commission independent of the executive and judicial arms
of government, and makes it only accountable to the people of Ghana through Parliament.
8
The Commission is expected to submit its report annually to members of Parliament who are
representatives of the people.
The Commission is headed by a Commissioner, and two Deputy Commissioners. It currently
has offices in all the ten administrative regions of Ghana, two sub-regional offices in Tema
and Obuasi, as well as 100 district and municipal offices strategically spread across the length
and breadth of the country.
CHRAJ is mandated to receive and handle complaints from members of the public whose
rights are violated, and to ensure that those persons are able to receive the appropriate
remedies. Therefore, all persons whose rights are violated can lodge a verbal or written
complaint at any of the Commission’s offices across the country. In addition, the
Commission is to adopt whatever means the Commissioner may deem fit to help members of
the public to be attuned to their rights through education. The Commission also monitors and
issues a yearly report on the human rights situation in the country, as well as ensures that the
nation also complies with all regional and international conventions and commitments Ghana
has signed on to.
Therefore, the Commission is expected to engage with its publics (complainants, respondents,
and the general public) across the board through communication in order to achieve its vision
of ensuring a society that is truly free, just and equitable, where human rights and dignity are
respected, where power is accountable, and governance is transparent. To this end, it is
incumbent upon the Commission to provide accurate, timely, and reliable information to
members of the public to keep them abreast of its mandate, in order for the public to avail
themselves of the Commission’s services to have their rights promoted and protected at all
times.
9
1.4 Problem Statement and Research Questions
Article 21 of the 1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana guarantees the fundamental
human rights and freedoms of all persons in Ghana. Article 218 of the same constitution
mandates the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice to promote and
protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all individuals in the country. Article 218 (f),
in particular, tasks the Commission “to educate the public as to human rights and freedoms
by such means as the Commissioner may decide, including publications, lectures and
symposia.” In addition, the Paris Principles, which serve as a foundation document for all
national human rights institutions (NHRIs), enjoin such institutions to be as open and as
accessible to members of the public as possible. By so doing, institutions are thought to win
the confidence and legitimacy of members of the public whose interests they exist to serve.
However, in Ghana, the airwaves are often awash with stories about the kind of frustrations
people go through in their attempts to access information and to avail themselves of the
services certain state institutions render to the public. This has led to several efforts being
made by past and present governments to address the problem and to ensure efficient service
delivery by all institutions of state. For example, in 2007, the New Patriotic Party (NPP)
government, under the leadership of former president John Agyekum Kufuor, introduced the
Citizen’s Charter with a view to “arresting the widespread irritations, frustration and
desperation encountered by the public when they come into contact with public agencies’’
(Ghana News Agency, 2007). The Charter was aimed, primarily, at improving
communication between institutions and citizens by way of giving citizens and stakeholders
10
essential information about services or functions of a public agency or department of the
government, and the manner in which they could assess the efficiency of those services.
CHRAJ is a state institution that is supposed to have constant interactions with the public.
Indeed, the Commission has officers whose duty it is to visit various communities and
educate members of the public as regards their fundamental human rights and freedoms,
providing them opportunities to explain the functions and activities of the Commission to the
public. Also, the Commission makes use of the media to inform members of the public about
its activities. Furthermore, the Commission’s offices are always open to members of the
public to enquire about anything of interest to them in relation to its work. However, there
have been complaints by sections of the public on the detachment of the Commission with
regard to its communication with the public (Forum for Public Accountability, 2012). The
problem of this study, therefore, was to investigate how in spite of these channels there
seemed to be a gap in information flow and access to information between the Commission
and its external publics. Given this problem, the study sought to address the following
questions: 1) To what extent would channels used by CHRAJ to communicate with its
external publics facilitate access to information; and 2) To what extent did those channels
make CHRAJ open or closed to members of the public?
1.5 Objectives of the study
The study sought to find out:
1. Whether external publics of CHRAJ knew communication channels that were
available to them to access information as well as to give feedback; and
2. The extent to which those channels made it easy or difficult for members of the
11
public to access information from CHRAJ.
1.6 Significance of the study
Being one of the few studies carried out in Ghana that concentrate on how state institutions
communicate with their publics, the study helps in pointing out some of the strengths or
lapses in how state institutions communicate with their external publics. Also, the study
provides policy guidance for CHRAJ and other state institutions in terms of how they can
tailor their messages to reflect the needs of the Ghanaian public. The study is also significant
as it provides a basis for further research as regards communication between state institutions
and their publics.
1.7 Operational Definitions
Wimmer and Dominick (2003) claim that the integral role that observations play in research
demands that one gets a clear statement of what is to be observed. Based on this assertion,
some concepts and variables used in this study have been operationally defined below:
State Institutions: Refers to all organisations set up by the state to provide certain essential
services to the public and are funded out of the public purse.
Publics: Refers to all persons who are outside of an organisation but have a stake in the
organisation’s work (External publics).
Open Systems: Organisations which allow their external publics to access information on
their activities.
12
Closed Systems: Organisations which do not allow their external publics to have access to
information on their activities.
1.8 Summary
This chapter introduced the study and gave general overview of how and why institutions
communicate with their publics. The chapter also defined the problem being studied, outlined
the research objectives, and the significance of the study. National Human Rights Institutions,
in general, and the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice, in particular,
were profiled. The next chapter situates the study within the systems and media richness
theories and reviews the related works on the study.
13
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATUREREVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter situates the study within the context of the systems theory and media richness
theory. It also reviews literature and studies relating to how state institutions communicate
with their publics. Additionally, the chapter looks at the limitations of the two theories used
and justifies their relevance to the study in spite of the limitations.
2.2 Theoretical framework
This study employs two theories (systems theory and media richness theory) to discuss how
CHRAJ as a state institution sustained its relationship with its publics through
communication, as well as whether the various communication channels used were effective
in assisting the Commission reach out to its publics.
2.3 Systems theory
State institutions are established to provide certain essential services to members of the
public. Therefore, the important role members of the public play in the successes or failures
of state institutions requires that the public is not kept in the dark with regard to what
14
institutions do. This relationship between institutions can only remain unfettered if there is
effective communication.
The systems theory is a relationship theory propounded by L. von Bertalanffy in 1968. The
theory looks at organisations as being made up of the following; an object, consisting of
attributes and having internal relationships among its objects, as well as existing in an
environment. Organisations have recognisable boundaries within which there must be a
communication structure that guides the parts of the organisation to achieve organisational
goals. The leaders of the organisation create and maintain these internal structures.
According to Grunig, Grunig, and Dozier (1995), “the systems perspective emphasises the
interdependence of organisations with their environments, both internal and external to the
organisation.” According to the systems perspective, organisations depend on their
environments for sustenance, while the environment also depends on the organisation for its
products and services. Cutlip, Center and Broom (2000) define a system as “a set of
interacting units which endure through time within an established boundary by responding
and adjusting to change pressures from the environment.” This means there is the need for an
effective two-way communication with inbuilt feedback mechanisms to ensure the
continuous growth of the system.
This theory, according to Niemann (2005), provides a model for seeing interrelationships,
rather than focusing on individual factors. He further argues that a primary aim of the theory
is to integrate accumulated knowledge into a clear and realistic framework. This implies the
need for communication to bring about understanding and cooperation between an
organisation and its publics. Also implicit in this view is the fact that an organisation, like a
living organism, is dependent on its environment for the essentials that support its life.
15
Therefore, an institution is regarded as a complex set of independent parts relating to adapt
continuously in a changing sphere to achieve its goals.
A closed system, according to proponents of this theory, does not interact with its
environment. It does not take in information and therefore is likely to lead to a failure or
collapse. An open system receives information, which it uses to interact dynamically with its
environment. Openness increases its likelihood to survive and prosper.
Organisations which adopt the open system always pick signals from the environment as
regards how they are keeping in touch with their publics, as well as how their relationship
could be strengthened through effective communication. As Littlejohn (1996) notes rightly,
open systems do not only generate feedback but also have flexibility on how feedback can be
used to adjust inputs to thrive in their environment. Closed systems, however, do not allow
much information to move in or out of the environment. To survive and adapt in the closed
system would require some degree of penetration.
Therefore, by resorting to the systems theory, I hope to find out how CHRAJ, in this instance
the organisation, interacts with members of the public, or the environment. Thus, how
information flows from CHRAJ to members of the public, who very much depend on this
communication in order to have their fundamental human rights and freedoms protected and
promoted at all times.
In the end, the systems theory will aid in finding out whether CHRAJ, as an institution, has
been open or closed to members of the public. Also, the application of the systems theory will
assist in making appropriate recommendations on how CHRAJ can improve upon
relationship with its publics through effective communication.
16
2.4 Limitations of the Systems theory
Niemann (2005) makes the argument that the increasing reliance of organisations upon their
environment and the systems in which the organisation functions clearly portrays the
important role that the internal communication plays for the survival of an organisation. As
proponents of the systems theory often make the point that communication creates and
maintains relationships between an organisation and its publics, both internal and external,
Niemann’s view is that organisations should be able to build internal networks to influence
interdependence within the system before external relationships.
Baker (2005) also argues that organisations are distinct units that conduct inter-organisational
relations for the purpose of exchange of information. Following from this, Fiol (1989) asserts
that the theoretical approach seems to preclude the formation of internal hybrids because of
its demand for the establishment of strong organisational boundaries. He makes the point
further that organisations with strong boundaries (closed system) are unlikely to engage the
interactive decision-making process of the organisation because of the likely fear of loss of
control over employees. Despite these limitations, the theory laid a framework that is still
relevant today as it underscores the interdependence of organisations with their environments,
and the need to ensure the free flow of information to sustain the relationship. Also,
Christensen and Cheney (2005) point out that corporate communication maps out all the
internal and external communication dimensions relevant to the projection of a coherent
image of the organisation in its surroundings. This, therefore, means that with a well-thought
through communication strategy, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative
Justice should be able to keep both internal and external publics abreast of its activities.
17
2.5 Media Richness Theory
Propounded by Daft and Lengel (1984), proponents of the media richness theory propose that
communication media have varying capacities for resolving ambiguity, negotiating varying
interpretations, and facilitating understanding. Two main assumptions underpin this theory:
that people want to overcome equivocality and uncertainty in organisations; and the fact that
a variety of media commonly used in organisations work better for certain tasks than others.
Daft and Lengel (1984) use four main criteria to present a media richness hierarchy, arranged
from high to low degrees of richness, to illustrate the capacity of media types to process
ambiguous communication in organisations. These criteria are: the availability of instant
feedback; the capacity of the medium to transmit multiple cues such as body language, voice
tone, and inflection; the use of natural language and; the personal focus of the medium.
According to proponents, face-to-face communication is the richest communication medium
in the hierarchy followed by telephone, electronic mail, letter, note, memo, special report, and
finally, flier and bulletin.
From a strategic management perspective, the media richness theory suggests that effective
institutions make rational choices matching a particular communication medium to a specific
task or objective and to the degree of richness required by that task (Trevino, Daft, & Lengel,
1990, in Soy, 2001). Therefore, the application of this theory is to help elicit whether the
various channels which CHRAJ uses in communicating with its external publics have worked
to serve the Commission’s interest of reaching out to its audiences.
2.6 Limitations of Media Richness theory
18
Dennis, Valacich, Cheri & Morris (1998) argue that although the richness of a medium may
create some differences in the way a particular message is delivered, it does not, in any way,
affect accuracy. Therefore, they explain that since what is important is the message that is
communicated, then there is no basis to conclude that a particular medium is richer than the
others. Again, Ngwenyama and Lee (1997), and Gerritsen (2009) hold the opinion that
culture plays a role in determining a receiver’s media choice. They note that media
preference is affected by communication mode and cognitive style. Barkhi (2002) suggested,
therefore, that even in a given situation with the same messages and motives, the best media
chosen can vary from person to person.
These limitations notwithstanding, the theory is still relevant to the study as it helps
organisations to find out whether the media they use are able to serve the purpose of sending
their messages out to their publics. The theory also helps in letting organisations know the
most effective medium to use for particular purposes, as they seek to remove barriers to their
communication with their external publics.
2.7 Related Works
According to Hargrove and Glidewell (1990), a public institution has a distinct identity that is
appreciated, accepted, and trusted by stakeholders. Therefore, a public organisation that
builds its identity around questionable or unacceptable practices is unlikely to escape public
scrutiny and political intervention. For institutionalisation to proceed, a public organisation
needs to select and routinize not only solutions that work but solutions that fit with prevalent
values and norms in its environment (Weeks & Galunic, 2003). This means that institutions
of state must embed sanctioned norms firmly into their operations, to create the coherence
19
required to perform, as well as being responsive to the environment within which they
operate. This requires that the organisation absorbs new demands and adapts its structure and
policy ideas when necessary (Boin & Christensen, 2008). It is, therefore, very important that
organisations engage in communication with their publics so as to position themselves for
changes which may occur within their environments.
Lammers (2011), in a study on ‘How Institutions Communicate: Institutional Messages,
Institutional Logics, and Organisational Communication,’ reviews scholarly and primitive
uses of institutional messages and related ideas in a variety of social science disciplines. He
develops the idea of the institutional messages as carriers of institutional logics. He considers
how people make sense of institutional messages as institutional logics are developed, shared,
and changed. According to him, institutional messages are collations of thoughts that may
have the force of law, intentionally or unintentionally spread via mediated and face-to-face
interactions in organised settings. As such, institutional messages may be seen as elements of
discourse, “the structured collections of texts embodied in the practices of talking and
writing” (Grant, Hardy, Oswick, & Putnam, 2004, p. 3). As Lammers further explains;
Institutional messages can be specified as having varying endurance, reach, and encumbency;
they are exchanged among individuals, organisations, and other institutions, and they
influence the behaviour of each.
The institutional message communicates the core meaning of an organisation to internal and
external audiences. In addition, the institutional message is understood as aligning an
organisation’s activities and image with rules established in its environment (Lammers,
2011).
Lammers (2011) elucidates further that institutional messages can be clarified by examining
the intersection of the extent to which they are intentional or purposive on the one hand, and
the extent to which they encumber the receiver on the other. According to him, on the
sending side, we can distinguish two types: those sent intentionally, and thus involving the
20
problems of clarifying, amplifying, or otherwise getting the message across, and those sent
unintentionally by virtue of the actions of the organisation or organisations that make up the
field. He also notes that, on the receiving side, we may also distinguish two types: messages
that the receiver has an obligation to receive and act on and messages that do not obligate the
receiver to take actions but, nonetheless, may make certain actions more or less likely.
Lammers posits, further, that we can identify strong institutional messages as those that
encumber responses from receivers, whether that means complying with a law, rule, or code,
or recognising the compliance of another, as in acknowledging the accreditation of an
organisation. In general, the more intentional and encumbering the message is, the stronger
the institution. Intentional messages that do not encumber responses or behaviours from
others are characteristic of fading or emerging institutions and some social movements:
Membership and participation is voluntary. Unintentional messages that do encumber
respondents may be understood as miscommunication, confusion, or perverse outcomes,
where the outcome is different from the intended effects. Finally, unintentional messages that
do not encumber responses are characteristic of weak institutions.
McPhee and Zaug (2000) also discuss four message flows that contribute to the
communicative constitution of organisations. In their work, they explicitly develop the idea
of messages as “the blood, the hormones, and the nerve impulses that affect and relate [the]
member cells of an organisation” (Terms, Assumptions, and Context of the Model section,
para. 9). McPhee and Zaug identify four requisite message flows: membership negotiation;
self-structuring; activity coordination; and institutional positioning.
In a study on Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) and their Communication Strategies,
Gonzalez, Lopez and Garcia (2008), analyse the communication strategies developed by
21
European Union Supreme Audit Institutions in order to publicise the results of their activity
and to provide the public with an overall vision of what they do. They find in their study that
when institutions begin to open up to the public, they become more accountable, justify their
existence, and that forms an essential component of their independence and efficiency, and
also brings about measures to assess the impact of their work.
In furtherance, Gonzalez et al (2008) note that SAIs’ adoption of communication strategies
will enhance transparency and accountability. Gonzalez, Lopez, and Garcia (2008, pp. 436-
437) put forward various reasons that explain why SAIs need to have a communication
strategy:
1. The capacity of public bodies to demonstrate the results of their activity allows them to
justify their existence (Waerness, 1999, p. 150).
2. SAI freedom to define their own communication policy toward the media and the general
public is an essential component of their independence and efficiency (European
Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions [EUROSAI], 1999).
3. Having a communication policy favours the establishment of impact assessment measures.
SAIs regard press coverage as indicative of the value of their work (Lonsdale, 1999, p. 103).
4. A communication policy can positively influence SAI compliance with freedom of
information legislation because it allows for information release through the different
channels open to it.
5. Lack of a communication policy gives the impression of a dull, gloomy institution with
little known about it, whose worth is debatable and whose existence could be called into
question. Such a situation could give rise to leaked information, half-truths, and
misunderstandings due to the lack of a mediator who comes between the work of the
institution and the journalist charged with passing the information on to society (Erbiti, 2003,
22
pp. 32-33).
In another study by Gonzalez et al (2012) which focussed on Communication as a
transparency and accountability strategy in SAIs, they emphasise the fact that these
organisations should base their strategy on three fundamental props—target audience,
message, and channels of communication. The study reveals, for instance, that the German
SAI has set its communication objectives as to fulfil its constitutional mandate, satisfy
stakeholders’ information needs, build a reputation for integrity and excellence and enhance
audit impact. Its communication strategy is aimed at three groups--audited bodies,
constitutional bodies (including Parliament and the Federal Government), and civil society,
media, and citizens (Winter, 2011, pp. 3-12). Apart from civil society, all these sectors are
considered by INTOSAI to be major recipients of its communication strategy.
Another revelation by Gonzalez et al (2012) is the fact that media relations also take place
through SAI websites. Several SAIs have designed their websites so that part of the available
space is devoted to the media. In Better Access, Better Information, Better News: The Ten
Essential Elements of an Online Newsroom, Bransford (2001, p. 3) points out that the best
way to guarantee that journalists get the right message is to set up an online newsroom with
direct access via a website. Canada’s SAI, for example, has a media room that contains
information about news releases, media statements associated with the reports, statements to
House of Commons committees, statements to Senate committees, statements to territorial
legislative assembly committees, and speeches. The Italian SAI has a system known as
“comunicazione,” which allows journalists to register and receive press statements and
newsletters by e-mail. The Cour de Comptes has a media space called “presse,” which offers
press dossiers, statements, speeches, summaries of reports, articles, and miscellaneous
23
publications.
Also, the Norwegian SAI website has a press statement file, while the Czech Republic
provides the media with its logo. Other SAIs that have media space on their websites are
those from Estonia, Mexico, Sweden, and the United States. All of them have direct media
room access from the main page, which suggests that the media are regarded as a primary
audience (Callison, 2003) as well as being one of the major communication channels together
with the Internet.
Social media has also been identified as a useful tool to evaluate public organisations’
openness and to improve their transparency and accountability (Druke, 2007; La Porte,
Demchack, & De Jong, 2002). One fundamental feature of social media that sets them apart
from the mass media is that the communication is two-way, allowing interactive dialogue and
participative decision making, thus reinforcing public confidence when communication takes
place between an institution and the public. Their use provides further advantages: they
complement the communication system; they are low cost; space and time obstacles are
practically non-existent; and they are easily accessible (Park & Cho, 2009).
Based on a survey, the study found that European Union SAIs undertake wide ranging
communication activities involving a close relationship with the media and the use of Internet
websites to publish their results and to provide users with an overview of their work. The
study also observes that communication policy has led to a communication strategy that
includes essential elements any organisation wishing to develop such a strategy should factor
in: objectives, audience, products, and channels of communication. It does not, however,
refer to other matters that are also important and that SAIs should bear in mind: reviewing
24
current strategy (if it exists), available communication tools, strategy budget, the strategy
timeline, instruments to ensure the right message is got across, and tools to measure internal
and external communication (Bennett & Jessani, 2011, p. 107).
The study highlights the fact that, on the one hand, SAI strategic plans are helping them to
define themselves by specifying their mission, vision, and values, and on the other hand, the
mission is going to affect the message, which will reach its target audience via the media and
websites. The media are able to deal differently with information produced by SAI activity.
This information can help them fortify their role but it can also weaken it if there is no
permanent communication with journalists that will prevent leaks and scandals, especially
related to information about audit reports, the main area of activity.
Therefore, Gonzalez et al (2012) recommend that SAIs should hold press conferences when
the results of an audit are especially relevant and, in other cases, produce press releases and
summaries. Their relationship with the media should not just be limited to reporting on audit
results. They need to weigh up the importance of the information to decide whether or not to
call a press conference or simply issue a press statement.
In a study done by Newton and Norris (1999) in the UK on confidence in public institutions:
faith, culture or performance, the scholars take a close look at institutions of representative
democracy and do an assessment of whether the public still has confidence in their ability to
deliver to their expectation. Based on a comparison of 17 trilateral democracies, the study
finds that an erosion of confidence in the major institutions of society, especially those of
representative democracy, is a far more serious threat to democracy than a loss of trust in
25
other citizens or politicians. Giddens (1990) and Seligman (1997) also argue that in our
large-scale and impersonal modern world, social and political stability and integration
increasingly depend on confidence in institutions rather than trust in individuals, so vibrant
institutions matter more to contemporary democracies than does the quality of interpersonal
relations among citizens.
The study concludes that at the national level, social trust and confidence in government and
its institutions are strongly associated with each other. It finds further that social trust can
help build effective social and political institutions, which can help governments perform
effectively, and this in turn encourages confidence in civic institutions. However, as Pharr et
al. (2000) observe, it is important to keep in mind that citizens’ performance evaluations
reflect subjective perceptions rather than objective measurements, and as such they are
dependent upon access to information through mass media and other sources.
2.5 Summary
This chapter placed the study in the context of the systems and media richness theories.
Amedahe (2005) argued that in undertaking empirical studies, researchers need to read
materials related to the problem or topic to find out what has already been written about the
topic. Consistent with this assertion, this chapter reviewed the related works on
communication between some institutions and their publics. The next chapter explains the
methodology used for the study.
26
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes and explains the research methodology. It covers the research design
including the population and the sample size, as well as the sampling technique, procedure
for data collection and subsequently how the data was analysed. It, therefore, covers how the
researcher went about gathering data to undertake this study and how the data was analysed
to produce the findings.
3.2 Research Design
The research is a study of how CHRAJ communicates with its external publics. The study,
therefore, employed the quantitative research method, specifically a survey, and a review of
some documents of the Commission. According to Wimmer and Dominick (2011), a survey
allows a researcher to collect a large amount of data with relative ease from a variety of
people, thereby allowing the researcher to examine many variables in analysing the data.
Reinard (1998) also believes that a survey is a good method to measure and describe the
27
distribution and characteristics of a population in its current setting. It is easier for researchers
to describe a particular phenomenon at a period in time to be able to draw conclusions which
are measurable.
Since the study sought to find out the extent to which members of the public receive
information in respect of the functions and operations of CHRAJ as a state institution, I found
survey the most appropriate method to use.
3.3 Population and Sample size
The population for the study comprised persons who work in the Ministries, Departments and
Agencies in Accra, as well as persons who have filed complaints with CHRAJ totalling 150.
In all, 210 questionnaires were distributed, with 150 respondents returning their
questionnaires within the limited period allotted.
3.4 Sampling Technique and Procedure
Respondents were picked from the various Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) in
Accra in a simple random sample. According to Wimmer and Dominick (2011), simple
random sample is the most basic type of sampling where each subject, element, event, or unit
in the population has an equal chance of being selected. Therefore, the researcher visited the
MDAs in Accra and distributed 160 questionnaires among the workers since they formed the
population. The distribution was done purposively bearing in mind age differences of
respondents and the need to ensure gender balance. Hence, the researcher decided to
distribute 80 questionnaires among females, with the other 80 going for the males.
28
The other 50 respondents were drawn from persons who had filed complaints with the
Commission at its head office in the Old Parliament House in Accra. A list of complainants,
numbering 150, was secured from the Complaints Unit of the Commission, which formed the
sampling frame for a systematic sampling with random beginning. The researcher, thereafter,
picked a number (8) at random as the starting point and a sampling interval (6) to draw the 50
persons from the list. Thus, the 50 included the numbers 8, 14, 20, 26, 32, 38, and so on.
3.5 Data Collection Instrument and Procedure
In gathering data for the study, the researcher depended mainly on a questionnaire (appendix
1) which was prepared based on the objectives of the research, and documents secured from
the Commission’s Public Relations Unit. The questionnaire was prepared to answer the
research questions, and almost all the questions were closed ended in order to avoid
ambiguity in the responses.
The four-part questionnaire included the various communication channels CHRAJ used, how
external publics accessed general information on the Commission’s work, how complainants
accessed information on complaints they filed, and demographics of respondents. Although
the study had two separate sets of respondents, the same questionnaire was used. This was to
allow persons who had filed complaints with the Commission before, but were not drawn to
be part of the complainants, to also have the opportunity to fill the last part which boarded on
accessing information on complaints. There was, indeed, one person who fell into this
category and so was able to respond to the last part even though he was selected at random in
the ministries.
29
Respondents from the Ministries, Departments and Agencies filled out the questionnaire and
returned them to the researcher for the analysis. However, owing to time constraints, the
researcher secured the telephone numbers of the 50 complainants who were selected and
called them on phone to administer the questionnaire. This approach saw some complainants
butting in with details of their complaints, but the researcher remained focused and elicited
the needed responses for the study. Out of the total number, there were 75 males and 75
females. Most (77.3%) of the respondents have received tertiary education, 15.3% secondary,
4% basic, whilst 3.3% have received other forms of education.
3.6 Data Analysis and Presentation
A Computer assisted programme – Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to
analyse the data collected. The data was screened and coded into the SPSS for analysis and
construction of tables, charts and graphs. It (the data) was later presented using the calculations of
frequencies and cross-tabulations. The choice of tables, charts and graphs for the data
presentation was to make it easy to communicate the summarized data. Discussion of the findings
was done focussing on the related works and the two theories (media richness and the systems
theories) that underpinned the study.
3.7 Summary
This chapter described how the survey was conducted in gathering data for the study.
Specifically, the chapter described the population for the study, the sample size, the data
collection procedure, the instrument used to collect the data, and the sampling technique used to
select the two groups of respondents. It also explained how the data was presented and analysed.
30
The next chapter presents the analysis of the findings and a further discussion of the findings.
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the data and interprets the findings in line with the research questions
and objectives set for the study. It also draws on literature and the two theories that underpin
the study and gives meaning to the findings by discussing and drawing inferences from them
(the findings).
4.2 Accessing information
In order to determine whether CHRAJ, as a state institution, interacts with members of the
public, the study sought to find out if respondents ever accessed information from the
Commission or not. Data gathered indicates that a little over seven in ten (72%) respondents
answered in the affirmative that they accessed information from CHRAJ, with 28% of them
31
responding in the negative that they did not access information from the Commission.
Lammers (2011) posited that institutional message communicates the core meaning of an
organisation to internal and external audiences. In addition, the institutional message is
understood as aligning an organisation’s activities and image with rules established in its
environment. The findings, therefore, seem to suggest that most of the respondents have felt
the need to learn more about the Commission’s work by way of accessing information on its
activities.
CHART A
32
And out of the 72% who answered YES, the chart above gives an indication of how often
they accessed information from the Commission.
The data shows that almost half (47.2%) of the respondents did not have a specific timeframe
within which they accessed information from the Commission but did so as and when
necessary.
However, 42.6% said they accessed information every month from the Commission, while
2.8% said every three weeks, with the remaining 7.4% doing so every two weeks.
4.3 Communication channels
33
An important area of interest of this study was to find out whether external publics of CHRAJ
knew communication channels that were available to them to access information and to give
feedback. To ascertain this, a question was asked of respondents to select from among a list
of channels where they first heard about CHRAJ. Below is a summary of the analysis of data
gathered on this area of the study. CHART ‘B’
The analysis of the data as presented on the chart ‘B’ above indicates that out of the total of
150 respondents surveyed, nearly half (45.3%) of them said they first heard about CHRAJ on
Radio, Television followed with 22.7%, with Newspaper obtaining 14%, whilst 7.3% of the
respondents said they first heard about CHRAJ in one of the Commission’s Outreach
programmes. There was, however, only 4.7% who read about CHRAJ on the Internet, with
34
2.7% hearing about CHRAJ from other sources which included friends and relations who
knew about the work of the Commission.
4.4 Preferred medium
The study also sought to find out whether respondents had their preferred medium through
which they wanted the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice to
communicate with them. The data gathered on most preferred medium of respondents as
regards CHRAJ’s communication with them also indicates that, radio remained the most
preferred medium with 55 (36.7%) respondents opting for it, while 48 (32%) respondents, on
the other hand, had a preference for Television, 22 (14.7%) meanwhile preferred Newspaper,
with 21 (14%) preferring the Internet. Only 2 (1.3%) respondents each opted for
Newsletters/fliers and Outreach respectively. In addition, a cross-tabulation of preferred
medium and age range of respondents reveals that, 18 out of the 21 respondents who
preferred the internet fell within the 20-29 age range. Also, 27 out of the 55 respondents who
preferred radio were within the 30-39 age range, whilst the other age categories were evenly
spread across the other media.
A further question was asked of respondents to indicate the degree to which they agreed or
disagreed to the statement that, it is difficult to access information from CHRAJ.
Instructively, 25.3% of the respondents strongly disagreed to the statement that it was
difficult to access information from CHRAJ, while 34% disagreed, 34.7% meanwhile
somehow agreed to the statement. Also, 1.3% of the respondents strongly agreed to the
statement, with 4.7% agreeing.
4.5 Communication timeframe
35
Since a major motivation for undertaking this study was to seek ways of improving
communication between CHRAJ and members of the public, respondents were asked to
indicate how often they would want to hear from the Commission.
CHART C
Data, as found on the Chart ‘C’, shows that almost half (49.3%) of the respondents surveyed
wanted CHRAJ to communicate with them every two weeks, with only 2% favouring three
weeks. Also, while 28.7% wanted to hear from the Commission every month, 20%
meanwhile did not have specific timelines within which they wanted to hear from CHRAJ but
believed there must be communication when the occasion demanded it.
36
4.6 Service delivery and its rating
The study was also interested in finding out whether respondents saw CHRAJ as an
institution that was ready to address their concerns. Findings on data gathered in respect of
this aspect of the study indicated that close to half (46%) of the respondents agreed that
officers of CHRAJ had always demonstrated their readiness to address their concerns, 26.7%
agreed strongly to the statement, with 24% agreeing somehow. However, 1.3% felt that
officers of CHRAJ did not exhibit good work ethic and, therefore, disagreed strongly to the
statement, while only 2% disagreed to the statement that officers of CHRAJ were ready to
address their concerns.
The findings speak volumes of the kind of social trust the Commission has built among
respondents, over the years, which is very vital for its ability to deliver effectively on its
mandate, as most respondents saw the Commission as willing to address their concerns. This
corroborates the point raised by Newton and Norris (1999) that social trust helps build
effective social institutions, and this in turn encourages confidence in civic institutions. Thus,
since most respondents saw officers of the Commission to be ready to address their concerns,
they would most likely make use of their services because they believed in their ability to
deliver to their expectation.
Pharr et al. (2000) rightly observe that citizens’ performance evaluations reflect subjective
perceptions rather than objective measurements, and as such they are dependent upon access
to information through the mass media and other sources. Therefore, the study sought to find
out from respondents how they would rate the services of CHRAJ and whether or not it was
delivering to their expectation as a state institution.
CHART D
37
The findings on how respondents rated the services of CHRAJ as captured on the chart ‘D’
above indicated that 45 (30%) out of the 150 respondents surveyed rated the services of the
Commission as very good, whilst 62 (41.3%) said CHRAJ’s service was good, and 38 (25.3)
respondents said the Commission was rendering satisfactory services to members of the
public. However, three (2%) respondents said the Commission’s service was bad, with only
two (1.3%) respondents rating CHRAJ’s services as very bad.
4.7 Filing Complaints
38
Since the Commission is the foremost institution with regard to human rights promotion and
protection in Ghana, the study also sought to find out whether respondents were availing
themselves of the Commission’s services through the filing of complaints. The data indicates
that 51 (34%) out of the 150 respondents surveyed had filed complaints with CHRAJ before
on various issues which hindered their ability to enjoy their fundamental human rights and
freedoms, whilst 99 (66%) respondents had not filed complaints with CHRAJ before.
All complaints were filed at the Commission’s head office at the Old Parliament House in
Accra. Out of the 51 complaints, 34 (66.7%) were written and filed by complainants
themselves, whereas 17 (33.3%) were verbal complaints which officers of the Commission
later penned.
As regards the complaint filing procedure, 43 (84.3%) respondents said they were satisfied
with the mechanism put in place by the Commission to receive complaints from members of
the public, whilst 8 (15.7%) respondents registered their displeasure with the procedure for
filing complaints.
4.8 Feedback
Since feedback is key to creating and maintaining cordial relationships between organisations
and their publics, the study sought to find out whether the Commission had a feedback
mechanism in place which kept complainants, especially, abreast of the kind of attention their
complaints received after they had been filed.
The findings indicate that, close to nine in ten (86.3%) respondents said they receive
39
feedback from the Commission with regard to their complaints. However, a little over one in
ten (13.7%) of the respondents said they were left in the dark about their complaints as
CHRAJ failed to give them feedback.
4.9 Complaint accessibility
Another area of interest of the study was to find out from respondents, especially
complainants, how they were able to access information on the complaints they filed with the
Commission. The findings are presented on the next page.
40
CHART ‘E’
Findings from the chart ‘E’ above indicate that more than half (50.98%) of the respondents
said they paid visits to the Commission in order to access information on their complaints,
whilst close to three in ten (29.41%) of the respondents said the Commission wrote to inform
them about developments on their complaints, with the remaining 19.61% saying officers of
the Commission communicated with them on their complaints via telephone.
Further, the study was interested in finding out from respondents how often they engaged the
Commission’s officers in communication as regards their complaints.
The findings from the data gathered indicate that, 24 (47.1%) out of the 51 persons who had
41
filed complaints with the Commission could not recall a specific timeframe within which
officers of CHRAJ communicated with them on their complaints, but said they (officers) did
so at their own convenience and the timing was not fixed. Meanwhile, 21 (41.2%)
respondents said the Commission communicated monthly with them on their complaints.
Also, only one (2%) respondent said communication took place every three weeks, with 5
(9.8%) respondents saying CHRAJ communicated with them on their complaints every two
weeks.
But the study went further to find out from respondents how often they wanted to hear from
CHRAJ in respect of the complaints they file. From the findings, nearly seven in ten (66.7%)
of the respondents said they would rather the Commission communicated with them every
two weeks on the complaints they file, whereas 25.5% said there must be communication as
and when necessary and, therefore, did not favour a fixed timeframe within which they
wanted to hear from CHRAJ on their complaints. However, 5.9% wanted to hear from the
Commission every month, with the remaining 2% expressing their desire to hear from
CHRAJ every three weeks on their complaints.
4.10 Public Education
The study also sought to find out from respondents whether or not they had received
education on their fundamental human rights and freedoms from CHRAJ before, since the
1992 Constitution in Article 218 (f), specifically, mandates the Commission to educate the
public on their rights. The data suggests that, a little over seven in ten (71.3%) respondents
said they had received education on their fundamental human rights and freedoms from
officers of CHRAJ before, with close to three respondents in ten (28.7%) saying that the
42
Commission was yet to reach out to them as regards their human rights education.
However, it is important to stress that as many as 47 out of the 51 respondents who had filed
complaints with the Commission said they had been educated by officers of CHRAJ on their
human rights, with only four respondents saying the opposite. But as many as 39 respondents
who had not filed complaints said they had not received education on their human rights,
whilst 60 respondents said they had.
4.11 Discussion
The findings of the study as regards the various channels CHRAJ uses for its communication
with its external publics go a long way to support what proponents of the media richness
theory have put forward that communication media have varying capacities for resolving
ambiguity, negotiating varying interpretations, and facilitating understanding (Daft and
Lengel, 1984). The findings indicate that most respondents first heard about CHRAJ on radio
(45.3%), followed by television (22.7%), with newspaper (14.0%), outreach (7.3%), internet
(4.7%) newsletters/fliers (3.3%), and other (2.7%) following in that order. While the findings
fail to corroborate proponents’ assertion that face-to-face communication is the richest
medium, it however supports one of the core assumptions of the media richness theory that a
variety of media commonly used in organisations work better for certain tasks than others.
For example, radio has proven to be an effective medium for CHRAJ’s communication with
its publics even though it does not require a direct contact between officials and members of
the public.
Indeed, according to the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice’s Annual
Report, 2010, the commission undertook a total of 3,051 public education activities across the
43
country using both the print and electronic media as well as the other channels featured in this
study. However, it can be said that radio worked better for the Commission than all the other
channels considering the number of respondents who heard about it through that medium.
According to officials of the Commission, its officers across the country have made special
arrangements with managers of radio stations within their various locales, which allow them
(officers) to appear on their programmes to not only educate the listening public on human
rights but to also contribute to important national debates on their platforms.
The findings also corroborate the view held by Bennett and Jessani (2011) that the choice
institutions make of one channel over another or the use of several channels will depend on
the kind of message, its content, available resources, and how the audience likes to receive
the information. This is because radio (36.7%) still remained the most preferred medium for
respondents even though it saw a reduction in numbers (compared to the 45% who heard
about CHRAJ on radio). Television (32%) and newspaper (14.7%), the other traditional
media, also followed radio closely.
However, the finding does not come as a surprise considering the many attributes radio has
over the other traditional media. Aside the fact that radio is very cheap and fast, it is also very
mobile which allows people to listen on the go. Again, most radio stations review the various
newspapers every morning which allows listeners to stay on top of issues. Radio also
provides the opportunity for listeners to phone-in to programmes to ask questions or make
contributions to the discussion, providing mechanisms for feedback from listeners and vice
versa. Radio can, therefore, be said to be a rich medium for CHRAJ to communicate with its
external publics.
In addition, the Internet (14%) came up as one of the most preferred mediums for
44
respondents. This supports the finding made by other scholars that the internet has been
identified as a useful tool to evaluate public organisations’ openness and to improve their
transparency and accountability (Druke, 2007; La Porte, Demchack, & De Jong, 2002). It,
therefore, behoves on the Commission to take full advantage of the internet and the
opportunities it brings in order to improve upon its communication with its external publics,
especially the youth, as evidenced by the findings of Gonzalez et al (2012), and corroborated
by Callison (2003), that most institutions are now making use of the internet to ensure
effective communication with their publics.
Also, as noted by Grunig, Grunig, and Dozier (1995), the systems perspective emphasises the
interdependence of organisations with their environments, both internal and external to the
organisation. The research findings amply support this assertion as 72% of the respondents
said they actually accessed information from CHRAJ. This supports the fact that institutions
and their publics depend on each other in order to sustain the system. The findings also
support one of the core assumptions of the media richness theory that people want to
overcome equivocality and uncertainty in organisations as evidenced by the number of
respondents who access information from CHRAJ.
Although the findings indicate that nearly half (47.2%) of the respondents did not have
specific periods for accessing information from the Commission, it emerges that 42% did so
monthly to have information on their fundamental human rights and freedoms, 2.8% every
three weeks, with 7.4% accessing information from CHRAJ every two weeks. There was,
however, a reverse when it came to how often respondents wanted to hear from the
Commission, as almost half (49.3%) of the respondents rather preferred to hear from CHRAJ
every two weeks. Meanwhile, 28.7% wanted the Commission to communicate with them on
45
monthly basis, whilst 20% wanted CHRAJ to do so as and when necessary, with only 2%
preferring three weeks.
Another important finding which the study brings to the fore is the fact that nearly 60% of the
respondents believed that it was not difficult to access information from CHRAJ, thereby
marking it as an institution which practised an open system. This, therefore, supports
Littlejohn’s (1996) assertion that open systems allow information to flow both within and
without, unlike closed systems which do not allow much information to move in or out of the
environment.
It can, therefore, be argued that since CHRAJ was open to the public, it had become more
accountable, justified its existence, and that formed an essential component of its
independence and efficiency, and also brought about measures to assess the impact of the
Commission’s work, as Gonzalez, Lopez and Garcia (2008) put forward.
The findings also indicate that the Commission had put feedback mechanisms in place to
allow for an effective two-way communication flow between the institution and its publics,
especially complainants. Indeed, nearly nine in ten (86.3%) respondents who had filed
complaints with the Commission said they received feedback from CHRAJ on those
complaints, underscoring the fact that the Commission was practising an open system. As
Littlejohn (1996) notes, “open systems do not only generate feedback but also have flexibility
on how feedback can be used to adjust inputs to thrive in its environment.”
The findings corroborate the admonition by Pharr et al. (2000) about the need to keep in mind
46
that citizens’ performance evaluations reflect subjective perceptions rather than objective
measurements, and as such they are dependent upon access to information through the mass
media and other sources. This is further expatiated in a cross tabulation of how persons who
accessed information from the Commission rated its services on the next page.
CHART ‘F’
47
As can be observed from Chart ‘F’ above, respondents who had access to information from
the Commission gave it higher ratings than those who had no access to information from
CHRAJ. This can be attributed to the fact that those who had access to information had been
cleared of every ambiguity and uncertainty about the Commission’s services and therefore
rated it higher, as proponents of the media richness theory put forward, unlike those with no
information. The finding, therefore, supports that of Erbiti (2003) that lack of communication
gives the impression of a dull, gloomy institution with little known about it, whose worth is
debatable and whose existence could be called into question. He warns, further, that such a
situation could give rise to leaked information, half-truths, and misunderstandings due to the
lack of a mediator who comes between the work of the institution and the journalist charged
48
with passing the information on to society.
4.12 Summary
In this chapter, data gathered on communication between CHRAJ and its external publics
were presented and analysed. The scope of the chapter, therefore, included the various
channels through which the communication is done, whether respondents have their most
preferred mediums, and whether or not respondents have difficulties accessing information
from the Commission. In order to establish respondents’ views on how they see CHRAJ’s
communication with its external publics, respondents’ ratings of the services of the
Commission, and how often they wanted to hear from the Commission, among other issues,
were also presented and analysed. The chapter also discussed in detail some of the findings.
49
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CONCLUSION
5.1 Introduction
This study sought to investigate how state institutions in Ghana communicate with their
publics, using the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice as a reference
point. It was, therefore, a response to the many who pour out their frustrations at the
difficulties they experience daily in their attempt to get access to information from some state
institutions, as expressed by former president John Agyekum Kufuor at the introduction of
the Citizens Charter in 2007 (GNA,2007).
The findings from the data were presented and discussed in the previous chapter. This final
chapter provides the summary of the findings and outlines, not only the limitations of the
study but also, measures that can be put in place to help improve upon CHRAJ’s
communication with its external publics.
5.2 Summary of Findings
In terms of the channels the Commission used in communicating with its external publics, the
result generally suggested that, CHRAJ had been using different channels including: the
traditional media (radio, television, and newspapers), outreach, fliers/newsletters, internet,
and even persons associated with the Commission. However, not only did most respondents
hear about CHRAJ on radio, but it (radio) also emerged as the most preferred medium for
respondents. Thereby, confirming one of the core assumptions of the media richness theory
50
that a variety of media commonly used in organisations work better for certain tasks than
others. The findings, therefore, emphasise the fact that external publics of CHRAJ were
aware of the various communication channels available to them to access information and
give feedback on the Commission’s work.
The study also finds that the Commission had been practising an open system, allowing its
external publics to access information on its work through radio, television, visits, fliers,
among others, without let or hindrance. In addition, it emerges that the Commission provides
feedback to persons who file complaints with it, making most respondents give the
Commission’s services high ratings. This, therefore, affirms the view held by most scholars
discussed earlier that when institutions communicate they help to remove every ambiguity
and uncertainty from the minds of their publics, and this culminates in they (institutions)
winning the support and confidence of their publics.
5.3 Limitations of the Study
Like any human endeavour, this study had limitations. One of such shortfalls was in getting
current related studies that were carried out in Africa, especially in Ghana. As a result, the
study relied on works on how some state institutions communicate with their publics mostly
in Europe. This did not make it possible for the researcher to compare findings from similar
socio-cultural backgrounds.
Due to time constraints, this study covered only persons who work in the Ministries,
Departments and Agencies (who belong to the middle class and were, therefore, expected to
have some form of engagement with the Commission as regards its work), as well as
complainants who deal directly with the Commission at its head office. Future studies should
51
be expanded not only to cover complainants from the other offices of the Commission but to
also cover other segments of the population (like market women, students, farmers, etc.), who
also have an equal stake in the Commission’s work.
Finally, this study sought to investigate how state institutions communicate with their publics
but focussed only on CHRAJ. Therefore, future studies need to shed the spotlight on other
state institutions too in order to have a clearer picture as regards how state institutions in
Ghana communicate with their publics. Inasmuch as the findings of this study provide very
useful insight into how CHRAJ communicates with its external publics, they (the findings)
must be seen within the context of these limitations.
5.4 Recommendations
As shown in this study, radio has proven to be the richest medium for CHRAJ’s
communication with its external publics. Therefore, the current practise whereby some of the
Commission’s offices have arranged for slots on various radio stations where they educate
the public on their rights should be replicated across all its offices, as it seeks to fulfil its
constitutional mandate (Article 218 f) to educate the public on their fundamental human
rights and freedoms.
There is also the need for the Commission to explore the potential that the internet presents as
an effective medium, in order to reach out to the youth especially. Considering the number of
respondents who chose the internet as their most preferred medium, and as evidenced by the
findings made by other scholars on same, CHRAJ needs to explore its usage to improve upon
communication with its external publics. For example, aside CHRAJ regularly updating its
website, it can also have a presence on Facebook or any of the other social media platforms to
52
engage Ghanaians on human rights education. This would go a long way to expand access
and generate opportunities for feedback which has been identified as key to ensuring cordial
relationships between institutions and their publics. Additionally, as the Commission focuses
on improving upon communication with its external publics, on the one hand, internal
communication channels such as notice boards, memoranda, intranet, and the use of intercom
to provide information to internal publics, on the other hand, must be improved.
Finally, the Commission needs to have a communication strategy to ensure it builds and
maintains constant relationships with its publics, considering the immeasurable role they
(publics) play in its (the Commission’s) successes or failures. This would ensure that its
communication activities are well coordinated and able to meet the needs of all publics across
the board. The researcher, unfortunately, did not come across any communication strategy for
the Commission whilst undertaking the study, as officials said they had initiated a process to
come out with one. It is, therefore, important for the Commission to have a communication
strategy, which would help it to better define and specify its mission, vision, and values in
order to ride on the public’s support to effectively deliver on its mandates.
5.5 Conclusion
This study establishes that the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice has
been engaging its external publics in communication, with radio as the medium most
preferred and used for the communication. While the study attributes this development to the
many attributes radio has over the other channels, it also establishes the need for CHRAJ to
explore the potential of the internet to improve upon communication with its external publics.
The study also evinces the Commission as one which practises an open system, as the various
53
communication channels made it easy for its external publics to access information on its
work. The channels also allowed the external publics the opportunity to give feedback on the
Commission’s work. This arrangement, of course, had a positive bearing on the ratings the
Commission enjoyed from its publics, thereby supporting the view by other scholars that
institutions which communicate with their publics win their (publics’) support and confidence
for effective and efficient delivery of their mandates.
Therefore, the data gathered served a great deal in assisting the researcher meet the objectives
of the study, as the findings amply indicated that external publics of CHRAJ knew the
communication channels available to them to access information on the Commission.
Further, this awareness made it quite easy for the Commission’s external publics to access
information on its work.
REFERENCES
54
Amedahe, F. K. (2005). Notes on Educational Research (Mimeo). Cape Coast: Unpublished.
Baker, K. (2005). Hybrids, Paradigms and Boundary Spanning: A Conceptual Framework.
Barkhi, R. (2002). Cognitive style may mitigate the impact of communication mode.
Information and Management. 39 (8): 677-688.
Barrett, P. J. (2000). Developing an Effective Approach to Public Auditing, Conference
Audience, Occasional Paper.
Bennett, G. & Jessani, N. (2011). The knowledge translation toolkit: Bridging the know-do
gap: A resource for researchers. New Delhi, India: SAGE.
Bertalanffy, von, L. (1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller.
Boin, A. & Christensen, T. (2008). The development of public institutions: Reconsidering the
role of leadership. Administration and Society. Sage Publications.
Bransford, K. (2001). Better access, better information, better news: The ten essential
elements of an online newsroom. Retrieved from http://riverkeeperpressroom.
gmtmedia.org/sites/default/files/TenElements2ndEd.pdf
Callison, C. (2003). Media relations and the Internet: How Fortune 500 company web sites
assist journalists in news gathering. Public Relations Review, 29, 29-41.
Canel, M. J. (2007). Comunicación de las instituciones públicas (Communication of public
entities). Madrid, Spain: Tecnos.
Christensen, L. T. & Cheney, G. (2005). Integrated Organisational Identities: Challenging
the “bodily” Pursuit. Critical Management Studies Conference Cambridge.
Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (2010). Annual Report. Available:
www.chrajghana.com
Constitution of the Republic of Ghana. 1992. Accra: Ghana Publishing.
Cutlip S. M., Center, A. H. & Broom, G. M. (2000). Effective Public Relations, (8th Ed.) NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Dennis, A. R.; Valacich, J.; Cheri, S, & Morris, M. G. (1998). Beyond Media Richness: An
Empirical Test of Media Synchronicity Theory. 31st Annual Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences: 48-57.
Dozier, D. M., Grunig, L. A. & Grunig, J. E. (1995), The Manager’s Guide to Public
Relations and Communication Management.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum,
Druke, H. (2007). Can E-Government make public governance more accountable? In A. Shah
(Ed.), Performance accountability and combating corruption (pp. 59-88). Washington, DC:
The World Bank.
Dye, K. (2009). Working with the media to maximize the impact of your audit work.
55
International Journal of Government Auditing, January 2009, 8-12.
Erbiti, Fermín (2003). Communicating Audit Results: Still a Challenge for Public Sector
Audit Institutions. Eurorai Newsletter, 14: 29–43.
Fiol, C. M. (1989). A Semiotic Analysis of Corporate Language: Organisational Boundaries
and Joint Venturing.Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(2): 277-303
Forum for Public Accountability. (2012). Press Statement issued on March 14, 2012.
Available: ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?1D=232752
Gerritsen, M. (2009). The Impact of Culture on Media Choice: The Role of Context, Media
Richness and Uncertainty Avoidance. Language for Professional Communication: Research,
Practice and Training: 146-160
Ghana News Agency. (2007). ‘Heads of Public Sector Agencies Sign New Charter, Accra
Ghana., www.ghana.gov.gh
Giddens, A. (1990). Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Gonzalez, B., Lopez, A. & Garcia, R. (2008). Supreme Audit Institutions and their
Communication Strategies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 74(3), 435-461
Gonzalez, B., Lopez, A. & Garcia, R. (2012). Communication as a Transparency and
Accountability Strategy in Supreme Audit Institutions. Administration & Society, 45(5), 583-
609
Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C., & Putnam, L. L. (2004). Introduction: Organizational
discourse: Exploring the field. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, & L. Putnam (Eds.), The
Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 1-36). London, UK: Sage.
Grunig, J. E. (1992). Communication, public relations, and effective organisations: An
overview of the book. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and
communication management (pp. 1–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Haider, H., Mcloughlin, C. & Scott, Z. (2011). Topic Guide on Communication and
Governance. Governance and Social Development Resource Centre, International
Development Department, College of Social Sciences. University of Birmingham, UK
Hargrove, E. C., & Glidewell, J. C. (Eds). (1990). Impossible jobs in public management.
Lawrence: Kansas University Press.
International Council on Human Rights Policy (2005). Assessing the Effectiveness of
National Human Rights Institutions, International Council on Human Rights Policy. Versoix,
Switzerland.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
La Porte, T. M., Demchak, C. C., & De Jog, M. (2002). Democracy and bureaucracy in the
56
age of the web: Empirical findings and theoretical speculations. Administration & Society,
34, 411-446.
Lammers, J. C. (2011). How Institutions Communicate: Institutional Messages, Institutional
Logics, and Organizational Communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 25(1),
154-182
Littlejohn, S.W. (1996). Theories of Human Communication (5th Ed.). Belmont: Wadworth.
Lonsdale, J. (1999). Impacts. In C. Pollit, X. Girre, J. Lonsdale, R. Mul, H. Summa, & M.
Waerness (Eds.), Performance or compliance? Performance audit and public management in
five countries (pp. 171-193). New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
McPhee, R. D. & Zaug, P. (2000). The communicative constitution of organizations: A
framework for explanation. Electronic Journal of Communication, 10(1/2), 1-16.
Moore, Mark H. 1995. Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Newton, K., and Norris, P. (1999). Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture or
Performance? A paper for presentation at the Annual Meeting of the American Political
Science Association, Atlanta.
Ngwenyama, O. K. & Lee, A. S. (1997). Communication richness in electronic mail: Critical
Social Theory and the contextuality of meaning. MIS Quarterly, 21(2), 145-167
Niemann, I. (2005). Strategic Communication Implementation: Towards a South African
Conceptual Model. Communication Management. University of Pretoria
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (2003). The Paris
Principles: A Reflection. Geneva.
Panos (2007). Making poverty the story: Time to involve the media in poverty reduction.
Retrieved from www.panos.org.uk/poverty
Park, J., & Cho, K. (2009). Declining relational trust between government and publics, and
potential prospects of social media in the government public relations. Paper presented at
EGPA2009 Conference
Pharr, S. J., Putnam, R. D. & Dalton, R. J. (2000) A quarter-century of declining confidence.
Journal of Democracy 11(2): 5–25.
Pollitt, C., & Summa, H. (1997). Reflexive watchdogs? How Supreme Audit Institutions
account for themselves. Public Administration, 75, 313-336.
Sambe, S. A. (2009). Achieving Effective Employee Relations: The Public Relations
Perspective. Journal of Communications, Media & Society, 1(1), page numbers.
Seligman, A. B. (1997). The Problem of Trust. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
57
Trevino, L.K., Lengel, R.K. & Daft, R.L. (1987). Media Symbolism, Media Richness and
media Choice in Organizations. Communication Research, 14(5), 553-574.
Waerness, Marit (1999) ‘Products’, in Christopher Pollitt, Xavier Girre, Jeremy Lonsdale,
Robert Mul, Hilkka Summa and Marit Waerness (eds) Performance or Compliance?
Performance Audit and Public Management in Five Countries, pp. 149–70. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Weeks, J. & Galunic, C. (2003). A theory of the cultural evolution of the firm: The intra
organizational ecology of means. Organization Studies, 28(8), 1309-1352.
Wimmer, R. D. & Dominick, J. R. (2011). Mass Media Research: An Introduction. 9th Ed.
Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Wimmer, R. D., Dominick J. R. (2003). Mass Media Research: An Introduction.7th ed.
Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
Winter, M. (2011). SAI’s communication with the public opinion via the media. Paper
presented at EUROSAI Seminar on SAIs’ Communication with the Public Opinion and the
Media, Warsaw, Polonia
APPENDIX 1
QUESTIONNAIRE
58
I. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA
(Please tick where applicable)
Gender
Male [ ] Female [ ]
Age range
Less than 20 [ ] 20-29 [ ] 30-39 [ ] 40-49 [ ] 50-59 [ ] 60+
[ ]
Marital status
Married [ ] Single [ ] Divorced [ ]
Level of Education
Basic [ ] Secondary [ ] Tertiary [ ] other (specify) [ ] __________________
II. CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION
1. Have you heard about CHRAJ before? YES [ ] NO [ ]
2. Through which medium did you hear about CHRAJ?
Radio [ ] Newsletters/news fliers [ ]
Television [ ] Outreach [ ]
Newspaper [ ] Internet [ ]
Durbars [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
3. Which is your most preferred medium?
59
Radio [ ] Newsletters/fliers [ ]
Television [ ] Outreach [ ]
Newspaper [ ] Internet [ ]
Durbars [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
4. Why is that your most preferred medium?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
III. ACCESSING INFORMATION FROM CHRAJ
1. Do you access information from CHRAJ? YES [ ] NO [ ]
2. If yes, how do you access information from CHRAJ?
Visits [ ] Letters [ ] Telephone [ ]
Internet [ ] other (specify) [ ] __________________________
3. If yes, how often do you access information from CHRAJ?
Every two wks. [ ] Every three wks. [ ]
Monthly [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] ____________________
4. How often do you want to hear from CHRAJ?
Every two wks. [ ] Every three wks. [ ]
Monthly [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
5. It is difficult to access information from CHRAJ.
60
Strongly agree [ ] Agree [ ] Somehow [ ]
Disagree [ ] Strongly Disagree [ ]
6. Officers of CHRAJ are always ready to address your concerns.
Strongly agree [ ] Agree [ ] Somehow [ ]
Disagree [ ] Strongly disagree [ ]
7. Have you received education on fundamental human rights and freedoms from
CHRAJ before?
YES [ ] NO [ ]
8. How do you rate the services of CHRAJ
Very good [ ] Good [ ] Satisfactory [ ]
Bad [ ] Very bad [ ]
9. How do you think CHRAJ can improve upon communication with its external
publics?
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________
IV. ACCESSING INFORMATION ON COMPLAINTS
(Kindly answer the next set of questions if you have filed a complaint with CHRAJ before)
1. Have you filed a complaint with CHRAJ before?
YES [ ] NO [ ]
2. If yes, in which of the CHRAJ offices did you file your complaint ________________
61
3. How did you file your complaint
Verbal [ ] Telephone [ ]
Written [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
4. Were you satisfied with the procedures? YES [ ] NO [ ]
5. Were you given feedback? YES [ ] NO [ ]
6. How do you access information on your complaint
Visits [ ] Letters [ ]
Telephone [ ] Other (Specify)[ ] _______________________
7. How often does CHRAJ communicate with you on your complaint?
Every two wks. [ ] Every three wks. [ ]
Monthly [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
8. How often do you want to hear from CHRAJ on your complaint?
Every two wks. [ ] Every three wks. [ ]
Monthly [ ] Other (Specify) [ ] _______________________
THANK YOU.
62