MEPs object to wording in Malta report

Members of the European Parliament's Civil Liberties Committee who visited detention centres in Malta openly disagreed yesterday with the contents of the report submitted by the delegation's rapporteur Giusto Catania.

Following a debate, committee chairman Jean Marie Cavada decided to postpone the vote at committee level on the report so that MEPs "can find some kind of consensus".

After the approval of a political resolution about illegal immigration by the plenary session of the European Parliament, in Strasbourg, a few weeks ago, which was inspired by the delegation's visit to Malta, the Civil Liberties Committee yesterday started debating the contents of the final draft report which is compiled after such visits.

The draft report, penned by Italian Communist MEP Mr Catania on behalf of the delegation, gives a step by step account of the delegation's visit, the meetings held with various NGOs and the authorities and also describes the conditions of the detention centres in Safi, Hal Far and Lyster Barracks. Generally, the report paints a very negative picture of Malta's detention centres and recommends that these are closed down as soon as possible. The report suggests that instead of detention, illegal immigrants should start being kept in open centres.

Mr Catania describes the visited detention centres as "horrible, intolerable and frightening".

At the same time, the report appreciates the work by the Maltese authorities to cope with this "crisis" situation and calls on the EU to intervene immediately and take concrete measures to help Malta.

At yesterday's debate, many MEPs objected to the wording used by the rapporteur and said the report did not reflect faithfully what was found and includes personal comments.

Stefano Zappalà, the committee's vice president and leader of the delegation that visited the island, said he will move amendments to the report as he cannot subscribe to certain parts of the document.

"We cannot put the Maltese government in the dock as if it was not doing anything to handle the big problem it is facing. This is not fair! Our competence is not to accuse anyone but to report factually what we saw. It is true that the conditions of certain detention centres are not up to standard, and we must say so, however the Maltese government is doing its utmost in the circumstances. Certain personal comments should be omitted."

Mr Zappalà particularly objected to certain descriptions by the rapporteur such as when he said the Safi detention centre was "a concrete building which is like a cage" and that the Hal Far complex's bathrooms "are in an appalling condition and there are dead and live rats which serve as pets". He strongly objected to such comments, adding they did not reflect the reality of the situation.

"The Maltese government was very transparent with us and completely opened its doors so that we could see what is going on. No other government has done that for delegations such as ours. Now we cannot make certain comments which condemn the government for its actions as this is an EU problem and not only Malta's," Mr Zappalà.

Other MEPs also criticised the wording of the report.

French MEP Martine Roure said it was not true there were illegal immigrants that had been held in detention for up to five years, insisting that such a statement must be corrected.

Italian MEP Romano La Russa said that although animals in a zoo are sometimes treated better than illegal immigrants in Maltese detention centres, the report needs to stick to the facts.

"We are not angry at the Maltese government over this. We know that Malta cannot cope on its own and the EU must step in." Maltese MEP David Casa said the report did not mention certain positive aspects such as the building of a completely new detention centre offering much better conditions.

"In his report, the rapporteur failed to mention that, due to our visit, illegal immigrants refused to move to the new centre. Our report should not go beyond the resolution approved by the European Parliament a few weeks ago. Malta needs encouragement and help and not condemnations."

At the end of the debate, the committee's chairman said it was imperative that such an important report would be approved unanimously in order to send another strong message to the European Commission and to the Council. He suggested that the delegation members should meet again to try to come up with a common stand until the next committee meeting when the final vote should be taken.