I write on behalf of Judge Emeritus Dr Philip Sciberras with reference to the two articles entitled ‘Ex-MP gets top pension despite objections’ by Ivan Camilleri, and ‘Ex-MP gets top pension despite Treasury Objections: Philip Sciberras applied when Labour came to power, and was also granted arrears’, both published on Sunday, May 18, on The Sunday Times of Malta and www.timesofmalta.com respectively.
The articles in question are not only riddled with inaccuracies but also with serious and libellous allegations levelled against my client to the detriment of his honour, reputation and professional integrity.
My client has never spoken with, let alone “pressured”, any official from the Treasury or other government or public sector officials with a view to obtaining an MP’s pension that was allegedly not due to him. Neither did he set up any “arguments” or make solicitations in this respect with any Treasury official.
The insinuation made in the article that my client purposefully awaited the election of a Labour government to obtain such pension is also completely baseless.
The first time my client ever became aware that he may have been eligible for this pension was when this was brought to his attention by his good friend and colleague, the late magistrate Dr Joseph Cassar (a previous Nationalist MP) sometime in 2013.
My client then inquired with the Association of Former Members of Parliament about the matter who respectfully took up the matter on his behalf with the Treasury and the Honourable Speaker of the House. In fact, my client has never personally applied for such a pension.
Furthermore, my client did not obtain this pension without a legal basis, as is being alleged. My client has served a total term of 2,826 days, which is roughly 93 months, which is far more than the minimum of 65 months of service as an MP as required by article 4 (1) of the Members of Parliament Pensions Act.
It is worth stating that according to the same Act the period of dissolution between one legislature and another is also taken into account in the definition of “service”, provided that the member (MP) is re-elected as a member at the first general election after that dissolution, which was indeed the case for my client.
This could have easily been verified by the journalist who penned these articles and/or the editors of the newspaper before the publication of these libellous articles.
Editorial note: The Sunday Times of Malta stands by its report, which revealed that the Treasury had objected to Dr Sciberras being granted an MP’s pension because, in its opinion, he was not entitled to it under law. That objection, and the subsequent granting of the pension by the government, which overruled the Treasury, are indisputable facts. This is the fundamental point of the story. This paper was merely relaying the Treasury’s interpretation of the law, not its own. Further, the journalist who wrote it never claimed it was Dr Sciberras who exerted “pressure”. And whether or not it was Dr Sciberras himself who applied for the pension or argued in its favour is academic, since by his lawyer’s own admission, the Association of Former Members of Parliament took up the matter “on his behalf” with the Treasury and the Speaker of the House.