In the article entitled ‘Police chief dropped action over blunder by CID officers’ (March 17), Times of Malta conveniently ‘forgot’ to mention quite a few things that clarify the situation.

During the course of a telephone conversation, Times of Malta was informed that the case against Inspector Elton Taliana was of a more serious nature than the one against the CID officers concerned, this because, in Taliana’s case, the offence is one of a criminal nature not simply an administrative shortcoming. I even cited the relevant article (137 of the Criminal Code) where there is an express provision on reporting unlawful detention relevant to this case.

I further elucidated that the malaise this case brought out in stark reality was the lack of communication between the CID and the district police, due to unprecedented heights of professional jealousy along with the fact that there was lack of proper legal training and review of such serious decisions of arraignment. It was for the same reason that, among other cases which still have to come to light, I had started investigations into the allegations of false testimony by a daughter against her father, which had resulted in the wrong conviction of the father.

There were other points the article missed out on, such as the fact that it is incorrect to have a sacrificial lamb(s) for treating a malaise of an administrative nature.

Treat the malady, as the internal report noted and requested in taking note of the good officers’ repute, is more important than simply chastising people.

(The author is a former police commissioner.)