NGO suggests Audit Office should be independent of Mepa

Failure by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority to renew its audit officials' appointments will confirm the authority's reluctance to safeguard the public's interests, an environment organisation has warned.

With appointments for the hot post due for renewal this spring, the group Flimkien Ghal Ambjent Ahjar (FAA) said it was alarming to see Mepa's attempt to terminate the employment of the investigating officer at its Audit Office.

Mepa's audit officer Joe Falzon told The Times last week he had threatened to resign last April after the authority's board tried to terminate the employment of his investigating officer.

Mr Falzon said the Mepa board had at first refused to renew Carmel Cacopardo's contract early last year on the grounds that he was "impossible to work with."

FAA said that the public now has it from the Ombudsman that the audit officer is "a tool to ensure a transparent and fair administration in the way the authority conducts its business."

Recent events have however now shown that he is not free to act without risking retribution from Mepa, FAA claimed.

"FAA therefore questions the wisdom, indeed the ethics, behind Mepa's direct involvement in the Audit Office. Would it not benefit us, the public, to establish the Audit Office independently of Mepa while retaining its current responsibilities?"

Mepa's Appeals Board has already lost credibility and impartiality and the authority's audit officer is the public's last stand, the last recourse where it can seek redress, the NGO insisted.

Civil society is at a turning point and citizens need to publicly support officials who safeguard the public's interests and rights.

As a land use and environmental regulator, Mepa must be seen to be acting in a transparent and fair manner. Mepa's attempts to block the public's access to the audit officer's reports have now been definitely overruled and condemned by the Ombudsman, the group said.

"We expect that Mepa will now heed the Ombudsman's report and desist from further opposition to this basic right in a democratic society."

Contacted for reaction, a spokesman for the Environment Ministry said that if Mepa's investigating officer was being subjected to pressure, then the auditor would not have come out with certain critical reports.

"He is not facing the axe. There are cases where Mepa has agreed with and abided by the Audit Office's recommendations, others where it didn't. We're talking of laws and procedures and Mepa has every right to disagree," the ministry said.