The declared campaign expenses of MEPs have come under fire from European Parliament candidates of both major parties, as it emerged no elected representative took an oath with their declaration.
The five MEPs elected in the June 6 election declared in the past week that they were just within the €18,635 legal limit, with John Attard Montalto saying he was €35 short of the threshold.
The European election was hotly contested between the candidates, with a number of them splashing out on publicity material and events. The law establishes a limit to ensure a level playing field.
Nationalist Party candidate Edward Demicoli, who admitted exceeding the legal limit by no less than €35,000, described the MEPs' declarations as "pathetic".
Labour Party candidate Sharon Ellul Bonici, who declared the highest expenditure at almost €57,000, said it was "impossible" candidates could have run a successful campaign under the legal limit.
PN candidate Frank Portelli, who declared his expenditure was in breach of the law before a magistrate last month described the situation as "ridiculous".
Alan Deidun, also a PN candidate, who declared expenses of €8,780, said "it is cheeky and brazen, to say the least, that elected candidates declared they respected the set financial thresholds".
He referred to one MEP who he claimed had spent tens of thousands of euros on personalised merchandise for constituents.
PL candidate Maria Camilleri said she was "very disappointed" with the way politics was being done.
"There were those who respected the law and those who didn't. Do you think those who claimed they followed the rules to get elected are going to risk losing their position?" she asked, adding politics had become the privilege of those with money.
Her views echo those of PL candidate Claudette Abela Baldacchino who recently asked: "Can only those with money represent the public?"
The declarations to the Electoral Commission show Edward Scicluna (PL) claimed to have spent €17,900; Louis Grech (PL) €17,688; David Casa (PN) €17,674; Simon Busuttil (PN) €17,570; and Dr Attard Montalto (PL) €18,600.
No receipts were presented, according to a Commission representative.
None of the five elected MEPs took the oath that should have been submitted with the declaration; neither did PN candidate Roberta Metsola Tedesco Triccas, as well as PL candidate Joseph Cuschieri, who will get Malta's sixth seat if the Lisbon Treaty comes into force.
Mr Demicoli said it was "definitely not" possible that candidates could have run a successful campaign under the legal limit.
He told The Sunday Times: "It's absolutely pathetic that the MEPs took this stand; this is not to be expected from elected representatives of the people. We know the law is bad, but instead of fighting it they are bending the rules. The politics being practised today has alienated people - this could have served to reverse that. Now it's a farce."
Dr Deidun said such a lack of transparency and accountability did not bode well for the credentials the same MEPs bragged about.
Ms Ellul Bonici said politicians should practise what they preach: "At the end of the day, if anybody wants to check, it's very easy to confirm everybody's expenditure."
Similarly, Dr Portelli said politicians had to lead by example. He was critical of the stand taken by Dr Metsola Tedesco Triccas, a lawyer, who said she spent €36,104 but only declared €18,408, which is the amount spent from the date she submitted her candidacy to the Electoral Commission.
Dr Metsola Tedesco Triccas had pointed out that the law did not specify when a person became a candidate so she proceeded to limit the definition to the period following the submission of a nomination to the Electoral Commission.
However, Dr Portelli said a candidate representing a political party officially became a candidate as soon as the nomination was accepted by the party. He described Dr Metsola Tedesco Triccas's stand as ridiculous: "If a lawyer says the law is an ass, then this should have been stated earlier."
But her argument was taken up by MEPs. Since their declarations did not specify whether they presented all their expenses or just those after the submission of their candidacy, The Sunday Times asked them to clarify the matter.
Over the past nine weeks, MEPs have ignored questions from this newspaper. However, this time, Dr Busuttil replied, on his and Mr Casa's behalf, levelling accusations against The Sunday Times.
"In your articles, the long-standing inadequacy of the law has been turned into a pretext to attack our integrity and we categorically reject your spurious allegations," he said.
"Your questions raise just two of a number of ambiguities in the law which expose it to conflicting interpretations, rendering its proper application difficult, if not impossible."
Dr Scicluna and Dr Attard Montalto ignored the newspaper's requests and Dr Grech said he was "indisposed".
The unelected EP candidates agreed the law had to be revised because it was outdated, but insisted it was not ambiguous.
On Friday, a second judicial protest was filed by EP candidates Norman Lowell and Emmy Bezzina who said they would institute a court case demanding an investigation if the Attorney General persisted in refusing to do his duty.
"The law is not ambiguous... and those who did follow the law were discriminated against," they said.
The Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition recently sent a joint letter to the Speaker asking him to ensure the Parliamentary Select Committee on Constitutional Change revises regulations on electoral expenditure.
cmuscat@timesofmalta.com