Air-conditioning in court

Reference is made to Dr Joe Brincat's weekly column (The Sunday Times, July 15) entitled "Not all in vain".

I would have expected that where the provision of air-conditioning units is concerned Dr Brincat would have known better what the situation in the Courts of Justice is. The way the article is presented gives the impression that the courts' sense of priority is completely wrong when reference is made to the floor that now houses the administration of the courts as being "...posh and resembling a hotel floor".

The comments are unfair and verge on being biased. Dr. Brincat seems to harbour an opinion that the courts administration should have been left working in small offices, scattered all over the Law Courts building and with no rights to using anything but old and unserviceable furniture. Is Dr Brincat trying to infer that administrative staff are not entitled to work in a decent and modern office environment?

Furthermore, according to Dr Brincat, the courts' administration funds "...have been depleted to have the fourth floor refurbished". Allow me to inform him that the project for the fourth floor administration offices was approved by Cabinet and its financing had been budgeted beforehand with an appropriate capital fund allotment approved in last year's budgetary estimates. These funds have nothing to do with recurrent financing for the ordinary running of the division.

It appears too that Dr Brincat has, very conveniently, forgotten that the Courts of Justice Division has been investing in various air-conditioning units in different halls, magistrates' and judges' chambers and departmental sections.

Lest he had forgotten and subsequently misled his readers, may I remind him that Hall 22, where trialist by jury are held, had been furnished with at least six air-conditioning units. All the five floors of the Family Court are air-conditioned as is the Civil Registry and the adjacent offices at minus one level.

Dr Brincat knows full well that the recently inaugurated Registry of the Criminal Jurisdiction, commonly known as the One Stop Shop, also boasts an efficient air-conditioning system. Even the Chamber of Advocates was supplied with a powerful air-conditioning unit!

It has to be pointed out that last year and at the beginning of this year, four halls in the Courts of Magistrates were supplied with two air-conditioning units each, with a maximum capacity of 48,000 BTUs. Another hall on the same floor is to be supplied with a similar system in the near future.

The courts' administration is also requesting the allocation of sufficient funds in next year's Budget to have a new air-conditioning system installed in all halls of the First Hall of the Civil Courts, replacing the old system which has now been in place for over 40 years.

It was in one of the halls still using the old system that the air-chillers developed a fault. Naturally Dr Brincat chose to ignore all this and concentrated his criticism on the last incident. Having said that, I would imagine that other civil servants working in other departments would envy the situation at the courts where practically all sections are provided with air-conditioning.

This is definitely a far cry from what Dr Brincat seems to have implied that air-conditioning is limited only to the fourth floor.

I hope that Dr Brincat will now find time to visit all the sections mentioned rather than disseminate an incorrect opinion after visiting the fourth floor administration offices.