ADT rapped for not having done enough

A board of inquiry has rapped the Transport Authority (ADT) for not having done enough before allegations of abuse in the way driving tests were conducted surfaced in the media.

It said in a report tabled in Parliament yesterday that the ADT had not been proactive and decisive enough, but had reacted to specific cases that arose from time to time.

The board also found that ADT management also seemed to have again failed to take decisive and appropriate action when a driving examiner, Nicolai Magrin, who was already implicated in the driving test allegations, was involved in a traffic accident while under the influence of alcohol in April. The accident would have gone unprosecuted had a report not appeared in Malta Today, even though the police had all the evidence to base a strong charge against the person concerned.

The board found that the ADT officially first became aware of the allegations of bribery in driving tests on February 5, 2005, when driving examiner Ian Pace reported the case of a candidate, Josephine Cassar, who had offered him cash as a bribe to pass her driving tests. At this instance, the ADT immediately reported the case to the police, who investigated and subsequently took court action against Ms Cassar. About three months later, on April 2, 2005, Mr Pace informed Major Peter Ripard, a consultant with the authority, of alleged abuses by driving examiners.

Following a meeting between Mr Pace and Deputy CEO David Sutton, the latter wrote a report to CEO Gianfranco Selvaggi informing him of these allegations.

On June 1, 2005, Major Mark Samut Tagliaferro was appointed Administration Manager of the ADT's Technical Unit and given responsibility for managing the six examiners at the Driving Test Centre. At this stage, he said, he was aware that driving examiners were being offered bribes to pass candidates, but no concrete evidence had been produced except in the case of Ms Cassar.

On June 23, 2005, Unit Manager Stephen Vella was ordered by Mr Selvaggi under threat of dismissal not to communicate with driving examiners. Mr Vella was suspected of influencing certain driving examiners under his charge with regard to the final result of the test to satisfy specific requests.

Since Major Samut Tagliaferro was not always in a position to ensure that there would be no communications between the examiners and Hall C, which was responsible for the driving licence process, it was agreed that the duties of booking driving tests by the examiners should be undertaken by driving examiners Roderick Galea and Jason Buttigieg by lot, subject to the said process being witnessed by other examiners to ensure impartiality. Major Samut Tagliaferro admitted to the investigating board that he was not sure what was really happening and whether his instructions were being complied with.

The board's report said it was strange that the next development on the matter took place almost six months later (in April 2006), when ADT Deputy Chairman Philip Incorvaja asked Major Samut Tagliaferro to personally take over the responsibility for the booking of the driving test schedules. The board asked why Mr Incorvaja, a board member, had to involve himself in an area of administrative responsibility that should fall squarely on the CEO.

In the light of what transpired later, the investigating board also asked why nothing of substance materialised in the ADT between October 2005 and April 2006 despite the fact that both the CEO and the Administration Manager of the Technical Unit were aware of the strong rumours of corrupt practices at the Driving Test Centre and despite the fact that they, especially the latter, had been advised to keep a vigilant eye on what was happening at the centre.

The situation would probably have continued had not a candidate, Carlo Brincat, requested examiner Ian Pace to change his school to Swallow Motoring School because a friend of his had passed his driving test on Saturday May 13 after the school's instructor, Stephen Mallia, had guaranteed him success if he paid Lm60 more.

The matter was investigated by Major Samut Tagliaferro who concluded that large sums of cash had been handed over to an employee of Swallow Driving School so that driving test candidates would be guaranteed passes in their tests. The police intensified their investigations and eventually five of the six driving examiners and two driving instructors with Swallow Motoring School were arraigned on bribery charges.

The investigating board said it found that, given the strong rumours concerning corrupt practices in driving tests that were circulating both inside and outside ADT, the matter should have been pursued more vigorously and in depth by ADT superiors and referred to the police for further investigation well before May 2006 when the allegations started to surface in the media.

Staff strongly suspected of corrupt practices, such as Ian Pace, Roderick Galea, Jason Buttigieg, Nicolai Magrin (the latter with strong evidence of irresponsible behaviour including being under the influence of alcohol while on duty) and Paul Grech were left in positions of responsibility and trust.

In his evidence before the board, the then chairman of ADT Mark Portelli said that his position throughout was that before referring allegations to the police they had to be substantiated with facts. He added that he might have changed his position had he become aware of certain evidence, such as the recording on a mobile phone of the Administration Manager of the Technical Unit trying to influence driving examiners with regard to the final results of candidates.

The investigating board said it was very surprising ("and, up to a certain extent, naive") how two particular examiners most implicated in the bribery cases were assigned the duties of booking driving test schedules at the very stage (in November 2005) when the ADT had decided to confront the driving tests problem. The situation continued for several months until April 2006 when Major Samut Tagliaferro was approached by Mr Incorvaja.

In May 2005, Unit Manager Stephen Vella was moved laterally despite strong indications that he had tried to influence certain driving examiners. His new duties put him close to (though not in direct contact with and responsibility for) the driving examiners, such that on June 23, 2005, he had to be reminded that the CEO would not take any further nonsense with respect to communication with the examiners.

The investigating board said it could perhaps understand the considerate way in which the CEO had tried to deal with the staff involved in these cases, especially when they had deep personal problems. But in the end this attitude could have been interpreted as weakness and was counter-productive, and could actually have led to the deterioration in the situation that materialised later.

Mr Selvaggi told the board that when verbally informed that examiner Ian Pace had recorded a mobile phone conversation in which Stephen Vella allegedly tried to exercise undue influence on him, Mr Selvaggi did not demand to hear the recording. When asked by the board why he had not at least referred the case to the police, he said that the then chairman of ADT had told him to limit himself to internal disciplinary action only.

The board found the attitude adopted throughout by Major Samut Tagliaferro as having been very weak, given the specific instructions he had been given by both the CEO and the ADT Board. It appeared that instead of dealing personally with the problems he took a detached attitude and more often than not passed responsibilities to subordinates, some of whom were themselves seriously suspected of malpractices.

With regard to the recording of Mr Vella's voice on a mobile phone, the board said this was neither investigated by the police, who were not aware of it, nor by ADT, who were aware of it.

The investigating board, whose briefing was not to deliver judgement on the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made nor to establish whether the people involved were guilty or not of the accusations attributed to them, made a number of proposals on the set-up and management of the Driving Testing Unit.

The board of inquiry was headed by Louis Cilia and included Paul A Attard and Richard Galea Debono.

The investigating board said it was very surprising ("and, up to a certain extent, naive") how two particular examiners most implicated in the bribery cases were assigned the duties of booking driving test schedules at the very stage, in November 2005 when the ADT had decided to confront the driving tests problem.