Prime Minister Joseph Muscat has proved himself to be a true master of trickery by convincing a vast majority of the Maltese electorate to vote Labour with his pre-electoral pledge of a transparent government that would implement a zero-tolerance policy on corruption, eradicate nepotism, and serve shoulder to shoulder with every Maltese citizen.

So many voters took Muscat’s bait that a Labour government would break from the old tribal politics of “us” versus “them”. His pre-electoral catch phrase “You may not agree with us, but you can still work with us” still rings in the ears of many of us.

Muscat pledged meritocratic equality of opportunity as opposed to arbitrary discrimination based on an individual’s political affiliation. He committed  himself to a just employment policy stressing that there would be no a priori job placements and individuals with the credentials would continue serving irrespective of their political beliefs.

However, once elected to power Muscat soon forgot all his promises and lost no time in heading in the opposite direction. The appointment of chairmen and chief executive officers of agencies and government entities sympathetic to Labour’s interests did not satisfy Muscat, and heads soon rolled in the civil service after he was sworn in as prime minister in March 2013.

Former Labour Party official and former deputy general secretary of the General Workers’ Union Mario Cutajar was appointed principal permanent secretary and head of the civil service on the very same day that the Prime Minister was sworn in.

The siege laid to the senior level of the civil service immediately after Labour took office was the initial step leading to the creation of a politicised administrative system

It did not take Cutajar more than a day to demand the resignation of all the 10 serving permanent secretaries. No thought was spared to the important role the permanent secretaries would have in facilitating government continuity resulting from the change in government.

According to the Constitution, the removal from office of a permanent secretary is at the discretion of the President acting on the advice of the Prime Minister after the latter consults the Public Service Commission. Yet, although this normal procedure was not followed, all 10 permanent secretaries agreed to tender their resignation after they were enticed by the bait of being given the liberty of choosing where to work within the public service in the event that their resignation was accepted.

Seven of the permanent secretaries were immediately replaced, not by seven new permanent secretaries, but by 11 new ones. In this way the number of permanent secretaries was brought up from 10 to 14 and this number has since been further increased to 17.

Although permanent secretaries are not considered to be political appointees, individuals known to be sympathetic to Labour’s concerns and compatable with Labour’s own partisan and policy preferences were selected to fill the vacated positions. These individuals included known party faithful, canvassers of Labour candidates and close personal friends of Labour ministers.

This move proved that, contrary to what Muscat had declared before the elections, he did in fact have a priori job placements in mind and that for him an individual’s political beliefs come before his credentials.

The siege laid to the senior level of the civil service immediately after Labour took office was the initial step leading to the creation of a politicised administrative system in the civil service. This made it easier to give government jobs on the basis of one’s political affiliation rather than merit. Jobs were stolen from suitably qualified individuals who were precluded from even applying, only to be given as so-called positions of trust to persons who helped the Labour Party or a party candidate before the last general elections.

Another thing to be noted is that a government minister seems to have an express lane at his disposal to rid himself of the permanent secretary within his ministry and replace him with a new one, without even involving the Prime Minister who is the sole person with the power to advise the President on the appointment and removal of a permanent secretary.

This emerges from an email by Tourism Minister Edward Zammit Lewis wherein he called upon the principal permanent secretary to have a permanent secretary with 40 years’ experience in the civil service removed from office. This situation puts a permanent secretary in a precarious position, since he may well find himself being kicked out unless he concedes to the minister’s wishes whether or not they are legitimate.

The Constitution has been rendered a mere political document serving the interests of the government and has been consistently violated where it prohibits distinction, exclusion or preference in favour or against any person in respect to his recruitment to a public office by reason of his political opinion.

Some really scandalous methods have in fact been resorted to to give unfair employment advantages with relation to financial compensation to known Labourites who were given a position of trust. A case in point concerns a political crony employed with the Ministry for the Family and Social Solidarity who was given a substantially higher salary than that actually pertaining to his grade.

Recently we have assisted to some critical flaws by the permanent secretary at the Ministry for Education and Employment, Joseph Caruana, in the case of corruption at the Foundation for Tomorrow’s Schools involving his brother Edward, an ex-driver and long-time canvasser of Education Minister Evarist Bartolo.

On the minister’s recommendation Edward Caruana was given an indefinite contract in the position of manager with the mentioned entity that falls under the supervision of his brother Joseph. No call for applications was issued for the post that carried a basic salary of more than €36,000 a year, which is equivalent to the salary of a director general in the public service. In addition to his salary, Edward Caruana was also given an entitlement to numerous fringe benefits bringing his financial package up to over €50,000 a year.

When the alleged abuses and corruption by Caruana came to light, instead of being suspended, he was seconded to the Rural Development Department from where he continued receiving a full salary. In contrast, a maintenance employee with the government on a salary amounting to half that received by Caruana, who was accused of bribery in the smart meter scandal that stung Enemalta in 2014, was imprisoned under preventive custody for some days and suspended from work on half-pay.

Corruption has permeated the Maltese public sector and, to that effect, the entire nation. Ever since Labour was swept to power the Maltese citizen has been enduring day after day a never-ending stream of injustices, widespread nepotism and some of the strangest excuses given by Muscat and his team to protect the privileged few.

This is completely different from the good governance that we had once­ been promised.

Denis Tanti is a former assistant director (industrial and employment relations) in the Ministry of Health.