Parliamentary Secretary for Justice Owen Bonnici told Parliament there was a lot to be done in Malta to achieve the standing of countries like Denmark and New Zealand when it came to the public’s perception of corruption.
A Bill presented in a haste, without attention to such a delicate sector- Opposition
Piloting the second reading of the Criminal Code (Amendment) Bill, he referred to a Eurobarometer Corruption Index Report, published in February, which showed Malta had fallen four places.
According to the report, 88 per cent of the Maltese believe that corruption is a problem and see it as being most prevalent in the Housing Authority (60 per cent), among politicians (52 per cent) and the judiciary (49 per cent).
Opposition spokesman Carm Mifsud Bonnici countered that he had expected Dr Bonnici to refer to an EU academic paper which stated Malta was doing well in its fight against corruption. Malta formed part of a group of 12 countries that were less exposed to corruption.
The Bill removes the prescription on corruption offences when committed by people elected to political office. It further implements the provisions of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption of the Council of Europe.
The Bill also includes a consequential amendment to the Civil Code, which excludes the plea of prescription in actions for the recovery of damages suffered by the Government, local councils or other public entities as a result of an act of corruption of an elected holder of political office.
Dr Bonnici said the Bill was the first step towards eliminating corruption. The Government would soon present equally important legislation such as the whistleblower and party financing laws.
The Government believed in honesty, responsibility and accountability and zero tolerance of corruption. Politicians should not be able to rely on prescription.
Why had the PN in government dragged its feet in implementing the recommendations of Greco, the group of states against corruption? It was shameful Malta was considered indifferent to such standards.
The PL government accepted Greco’s proposals and sought to increase punishments committed by corrupt judiciary members. It would also increase punishment for trading in influence offences.
Dr Bonnici said people wanted a clear-cut detachment from the past and one should not wait for more reports stating the political class was corrupt in order to act. It was not acceptable to keep offering an easy way out for corrupt politicians.
Dr Mifsud Bonnici said the Bill was presented in a hurry and without attention to such a delicate sector. It seemed the Government moved the Bill just to be able to argue it kept its promise.
The Opposition was against corruption and would support government-proposed effective measures but not Bills “presented in bluff”.
Maltese legislation already had mechanisms to fight corruption that should be strengthened, not undermined.
The PN government had set up the Permanent Commission Against Corruption, the Office of the Auditor General and the Office of the Ombudsman.
The current Government should have sought advice from Judge Giovanni Bonello, who said removing prescription may be great news for a citizen but was perplexing from a human rights perspective.
Judge Bonello had questioned whether such a trial could be fair if it was tried several years after corruption had taken place.
The Criminal Code provided that prescription did not lapse in crimes when the offender was unknown.
On the removal of prescription with respect to civil remedies in corruption cases, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said the Civil Code provided a mechanism to let people institute a civil action to recover damages.
Dr Mifsud Bonnici criticised the removal of the former Police Commissioner, who he said had fought corruption and crime in the field, and for replacing those on the Commission against Corruption. The Government was throwing away years of experience and ability.