(Adds statement by Dr Borg and Ms Sciberras)
A member of the Broadcasting Authority has accused two of his colleagues in court of not being impartial when considering complaints on political balance, finding guilt before even hearings about a case.
Testifying in a civil case launched by Public Broadcasting Services against the Broadcasting Authority, Alfred Mallia Milanes said he was bothered by the atmosphere within the board whenever it had to consider a case.
This atmosphere, he said, did not allow members to rise above their political beliefs. Before any case was heard a certain hostility was shown and Reno Borg and Rose Sciberras always had reservations. They found guilt before a case started to be heard. They were always hostile and aggressive and always showed their bias, he claimed.
Mr Mallia Milanes said that he was on the witness stand to tell the truth and not to throw mud and cast doubts. This, he said, was not his style.
In the case, PBS is complaining that whenever a complaint of political bias was filed with the BA, it was not assured of an independent and impartial hearing.
Ms Sciberras and Dr Borg, it said, could not be impartial because they were members of the PL’s Facebook page and had Kurt Farrugia (the PL's press officer) and Gino Cauchi (PL spokesman on broadcasting) among their friends.
Mr Farrugia and Mr Cauchi were involved in some of the complaints, they argued.
BORG, SCIBERRAS DENY CLAIMS
In a statement issued in the evening, Dr Borg and Ms Sciberras said they were considering taking legal action for slander against Mr Mallia Milanes.
His testimony, they said, was untrue and did not reflect what actually took place at the authority.
Dr Borg and Ms Sciberras said that when a case was being considered, they listened to the parties involved, discussed and deliberated on the facts and subsequently took a collective decision based on a majority vote.
They said that as BA members, they did not represent any party but did their duties according to their position and in the interest of viewers and the respective radio or television.
They said that in April 2010, it was Mr Mallia Milanes who criticised a BA decision against PBS , showing his bias and breaching the collegial principal of the authority and the code of ethics.
They said they considered Mr Mallia Milanes’s testimony as a direct attack on the BA at a sensitive time because of the electoral campaign.
This, they said, would not stop them from continuing to carry out their duties according to conscience and to be of loyal service to the authority.