The Police Commissioner was right to refuse a private security guard licence to a man who had been convicted of being an accomplice with another man in a case involving possession of cocaine, the Administrative Review Tribunal has ruled.

The tribunal heard a case instituted by Carl Grima, who contested the Commissioner's decision to turn down his application for a licence in November last year on grounds of public interest.

The tribunal noted that a court had found that Mr Grima had handed his identity card to another man who used it for the commissioning of a crime. He was convicted and conditionally discharged.

Mr Grima argued before the tribunal that the Commissioner had no right to refuse his application because in terms of the law he had not been found guilty of a serious crime, and, indeed, he had been given a conditional discharge.

The tribunal in its decision referred to caselaw and said that this case was not about Mr Grima's record, but about whether it was in the public interest that he should be granted a private security guard's licence.

It was logical and legitimate that the Commissioner considered the public interest before granting licences.

Although Mr Grima had tried to downplay the seriousness of his actions by arguing that he had been given a conditional discharge, the tribunal said it appreciated the Commissioner's concerns. The commissioner was justified to consider that Mr Grima was not suitable to work as a security guard and therefore, in the public interest, he should not be granted a licence.