Owen Bonnici said the government wanted to catch “the spider that spun the web” rather than the “small fish” when referring to an amnesty for consumers who defrauded Enemalta.
The Justice Parliamentary Secretary defended the government’s decision not to take criminal action against more than 1,000 consumers who benefited from tampered smart meters when asked to justify the move at a public meeting in Gżira yesterday.
He said those consumers who were involved in the illegal scheme had to pay back the money they owed the corporation as well as a penalty that amounted to 10 per cent of the defrauded amount. They must also come forward with information on those who masterminded the scheme.
Dr Bonnici urged consumers with tampered smart meters to come forward with information rather than wait for the corporation to identify them. He said the scheme was possible under a legal notice passed in the last legislature that empowered the Enemalta chairman to reach an agreement with consumers who defrauded the corporation.
Dr Bonnici was speaking at a public meeting that forms part of the ongoing series ‘A government that listens’ in which Cabinet members listen to the concerns of people.
Focusing on the justice sector, he said the time had come for all court halls to be used at all times of the day, each day of the week.
“I get really angry when I know that on Monday and Friday the court halls work at 50 per cent or even 30 per cent of their capacity when we have such a backlog of cases,” Dr Bonnici said.
He acknowledged people did not trust change could happen at the law courts but insisted the government had the will to push ahead with reform, adding the judiciary was cooperating.
Dr Bonnici said it was not right to have the law courts work three days a week until noon with people being summoned at 9am irrespective of the time the case would be heard.
Referring to the court reform blueprint prepared by the Bonello Commission last year, Dr Bonnici said most of the proposals could be implemented without incurring any expenditure.
One of the proposals was to shift the onus of responsibility on the parties in a case to know when the next sitting is due, so as to avoid having cases remanded unnecessarily when either of the parties failed to turn up.