Progress has been registered in the long-running dispute between the government and the Ombudsman’s Office, on which entity has the right to probe complaints filed by army members, following talks held on Tuesday.
Though no agreement is yet in sight, Ombudsman Joseph Said Pullicino and Home Affairs Minister Manuel Mallia are expected to hold further talks to discuss a number of proposals.
Considering the notoriously slow pace of court proceedings, the case could still be pending by the time Dr Said Pullicino’s term ends in February 2016
This development marks a defusing of tensions between both sides, following a series of accusations at each other in a number of judicial protests.
However, there was a mood of cautious optimism following the first face-to-face meeting between Dr Mallia and Dr Said Pullicino since the onset of this dispute.
A spokesman for the Ombudsman told Times of Malta that “progress had been registered” in what he described as a “cordial” meeting. While giving no further details he said further meetings would be required.
On the other hand, he reiterated that under the Ombudsman Act, the office had jurisdiction to investigate complaints made by officers of the Armed Forces of Malta.
A ministry spokeswoman told this newspaper both sides agreed there was a “legal anomaly”, which could be addressed through a number of law amendments.
She added that the Ombudsman’s Office would forward its proposals to the ministry.
This issue has been going on since March, when the minister had told Parliament that by law the Ombudsman had no power to look into complaints over promotions, pay and pension rights of army members.
Dr Mallia had been speaking in the wake of a request filed by the Opposition to look into the methodology used by an army complaints’ board set up last year following a change of government. In the meantime, some army officials had filed a separate complaint with the Ombudsman over a number accelerated promotions handed out last September, which had fuelled controversy.
The government is contending that according to the Armed Forces Act, army members can seek redress by filing their complaint with the commander who can then refer the case to the President.
The only circumstance in which the Ombudsman can investigate these complaints is when all other avenues have been exhausted, the government is insisting. The minister is also basing his case on a decision dating back to 2003, where Dr Said Pullicino’s predecessor had declined to probe such cases.
On his part, the Ombudsman is arguing that this particular decision was “manifestly mistaken”.
He is insisting that, in 2011, his office and the army had reached an agreement, through which a standard procedure for filing such complaints had been established.
In the case of the accelerated promotions, Dr Said Pullicino is arguing that the army commander could not redress the complaints himself because he was one of the interested parties.
The Ombudsman is also contending that only a court can decide which entity has the right to look into such complaints, not the ministry. Though this avenue now seems less likely as both sides are intent on finding an amicable solution, army sources who spoke to this newspaper were concerned that time was running out.
They explained that if these talks failed, it would be up to a court to give a ruling.
“Considering the notoriously slow pace of court proceedings, the case could still be pending by the time Dr Said Pullicino’s term ends in February 2016.
“This would open up the possibility that his successor would decide to drop the case, dealing a fatal blow to our quest to keep the option of having an independent body probing such complaints,” one source said.