The great Mugliett bypass
The way the Prime Minister is tackling the involvement by Minister Jesmond Mugliett to create a bypass from a court order beggars belief. Rather than ending the saga which started from over-zealousness regarding a supporter, the Prime Minister has...
The way the Prime Minister is tackling the involvement by Minister Jesmond Mugliett to create a bypass from a court order beggars belief. Rather than ending the saga which started from over-zealousness regarding a supporter, the Prime Minister has immersed himself in it, only to emerge muddied all over. The simple facts of the matter were very clear well before Lawrence Gonzi spoke over the weekend as if he were some defence lawyer.
Two men were charged with bribery in carrying out their functions at the transport authority. A court found them guilty, and ordered that they be banned from holding public office for life. Their employment was terminated, in line with established public policy. They pleaded for a presidential pardon. Minister Mugliett intervened.
He did not do so with the authority's board - so its chairman and members are correct in saying that the minister did not try to influence them. Mr Mugliett intervened with the authority's highest employee, the CEO, to suggest that the two men be reinstated on half pay, pending their request for a pardon. Thereby he bypassed not only the board, but the court as well. The two men were reinstated, contrary to both the court's and the board's decision.
It was only after the CEO had spilled the beans, revealing that "the ministry" had intervened, that the minister admitted his action. Following the uproar that followed, he told Parliament that he had been part of a collective decision. "Collective" - the minister revealed when a fresh uproar ensued - meant that he had spoken with the CEO and the legal adviser.
Dr Gonzi found breathtaking satisfaction in all of that. He declared it was very satisfying to him that the public administration was showing it was able to uncover abuse and to take determined action for democracy to be further strengthened. "The government's message," he thundered, "is very clearly in favour of the highest standard of transparency and accountability in public administration".
The PM may fool himself. The people are not as gullible. Mr Mugliett's approach to the CEO was not made immediately public through any proactive exercise in transparency by the minister or Dr Gonzi himself. The Press winkled it out. Overriding a court order, albeit temporarily, does not strengthen democracy. Ignoring political accountability undermines democracy.
Dr Gonzi can easily hear the rising rumble of discontent at the way he is acting in regard to the great Mugliett bypass of a court decision. Still, he rejected the minister's offer to resign. He did not even deign to shuffle him into another Cabinet position to show he was sensitive to the need for ministers to be above suspicion, like Caesar's wife. That was his privilege.
It cannot be any Prime Minister's privilege to indulge in weak whitewash or to try to pull the wool over the people's eyes. What Dr Gonzi owed to the country, in the name of transparent democracy, was to say how it had come about that, earlier on, the President pardoned another transport authority employee who had also been found guilty of bribery. Who had advised the President to grant that pardon, which has enabled the other convicted duo to claim they were discriminated upon? Can it be satisfying to the PM that, when the public administration uncovers abuse and those guilty of it are convicted, they are subsequently pardoned?
That precedent led to Mr Mugliett's error lay in bypassing the court to suggest temporary reinstatement on the basis of the earlier pardon. The minister should have left that to the convicted men's legal representatives to press. The Prime Minister's error lies in compounding that of Mr Mugliett, and in not expressing himself clearly about the way the presidential pardon avenue is being exploited.
Under the Labour government of 1996-98, a minister left the Cabinet over a presidential pardon, though he could have argued that he had not been properly advised by the bureaucracy. This time round, a minister blundered, and the Prime Minister champions him with very clear but seriously weak spin. It is easy to see why the Gonzi government is unravelling.