I refer to Julia Farrugia’s letter ‘Press Ethics Commission decision’s discrepancies’ (The Sunday Times, September 4). I wish to set the record straight that the PEC did not have a recorder at its disposal and not bother to use it, as Ms Farrugia said.

As vice-chairman of the Institute of Maltese Journalists she should know that I wrote to the institute’s secretary requesting that the PEC be provided recording facilities on July 25, after the hearing of the Joseph Mizzi complaint against Ms Farrugia on July 21.

A digital recorder was subsequently made available to the PEC by the institute and I acknowledged its receipt on August 3.

The PEC afforded ample hearing to the case, allowing both sides full opportunity to make their submissions, and took detailed notes of the substance of the testimony given.

The PEC then adjourned to July 27 when it dedicated an entire sitting to debate the merits of the case and to reach a decision, which was subsequently drawn up in writing and published on August 22 after the PEC also had to deal with a submission by Ms Farrugia that the proceedings were vitiated due to an alleged conflict of interest on the part of one of the members who heard the case.

The Maltese Institute of Journalists appoints the PEC and charges it to independently and impartially consider complaints concerning alleged breaches by journalists of the institute’s code of journalistic ethics. So I cannot fathom why Ms Farrugia would seek to muddy the waters, even though I appreciate that she is an interested party in the Mizzi case, and has every right to disagree with the conclusions reached.

The institute does right to publish this code and to entrust an independent commission to apply and enforce it fairly and in the most expeditious manner possible, far away from the realm of the courts of justice.

This is what self-regulation of the journalistic profession is all about, and is what every civilised country aspires to.

The PEC is also proud to be a member of the Association of Independent Press Councils of Europe, in which it takes an active part.

For obvious reasons the PEC cannot enter into a public debate with Ms Farrugia or anyone else for that matter concerning the merits of any particular proceedings it may have conducted.

I can, however, assure her she was given a fair hearing, the PEC did nothing but its duty without fear or favour, and that the PEC is not at all interested in any political manoeuvres and ball games, much less in any personal attacks against individuals as quickly followed in the wake of its decision in this case.