Former Police Commissioner Peter Paul Zammit decided arbitrarily and without explanation to drop police proceedings against a former client of his who caused a ruckus at the Żabbar police station in 2013, an inquiry concluded.

The report by the Board of Inquiry, presided over by Judge Franco Depasquale, was tabled in Parliament last night by Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Abela.

Dated July 31, 2014, it has been the subject of a Freedom of Information request by Times of Malta going back to last November.

However, despite several reminders and an eventual fine imposed on the ministry by the Data Protection Office, the report was kept under wraps until now.

The report was finally tabled last night after a higher fine was imposed, €1,250 plus €25 for every day the ministry failed to reply.

The report concludes there was no justification for the suspension and eventual withdrawal of the planned charges against Josmar Agius, and this appeared to be a unilateral decision by Mr Zammit.

Detailing the incident, it says a visibly angry Mr Agius entered the police station on June 7, 2013, and complained loudly about the way his daughter had been treated when she called to report a stolen mobile phone.

Mr Agius, however, would not wait in the queue behind other people, according to the report. He entered an office, banged the mobile phone box on a desk and threatened the policemen with a loud voice that he would report them.

‘Man was my former client’

He said he would phone “Peter Paul” and in fact made a phone call in which he was heard complaining to the other person on the line about “the people you have at the Żabbar police station”.

He then requested a complaints form, which had to be produced from elsewhere as none was available at the Żabbar police station.

A current incident report was filed shortly afterwards. Next day, Mr Zammit requested a detailed report of what had happened.

A few days later, Sergeant Mallan, who had been in charge, was asked to call at police HQ to speak to Inspector Marisa Zammit, in charge of human resources and internal affairs.  He was told not to take action against Mr Agius, on instructions from the commissioner.

Later the inspector wrote to the commissioner, saying charges should be issued and the court outcome awaited.

The commissioner subsequently wrote in the file: “Suspend proceedings.”

Withdraw charges against Mr Agius

Then Superintendent Vella Gregory wrote: “Why should we suspend proceedings when police officers were involved?”

In November 2013, the Commissioner wrote to ask if his instructions had been observed. An assistant commissioner replied that procedures had been suspended.

On December 4, 2013, the Commissioner wrote: “Withdraw charges against Mr Agius.” No reason was given.

The board found that the charges had already been drafted and a summons was also prepared but never issued.

The former commissioner told the board that Mr Agius was a former client of his. He confirmed that Mr Agius had phoned him when the incident took place. He took a personal interest in the case and the day after read the report.

Asked why he had requested proceedings to be suspended and then dropped, he said the charges were not justified. He decided in this manner on the basis of the report and confirmed no investigation had been made and no witnesses were heard.

The board said it could not understand why the former commissioner ignored all advice – even in writing – including the advice of a superintendent.

The inquiry was ordered following a request made by PN MP Jason Azzopardi last June.