A soldier who was discharged after his critical video about army spending on a Pembroke gate went viral has filed a judicial protest against the army, seeking reinstatement.

Former bombardier Godwin Schembri, who was dismissed in November, claimed the army's decision was  “discriminatory” and “unreasonable.”

The video clip showed Bombardier Schembri driving an army vehicle as he mocked the army’s top brass over a recently-installed free-standing gate, meant to control access to the AFM’s shooting range in Pembroke, but rendered useless by the absence of a fence on either side.

READ:Brick wall erected after ‘army gate’ controversy

Bombardier Schembri had flagged the matter as he swerved around the closed gate in the military truck, making ‘colourful’ remarks, while other soldiers on board giggled in the background.

The army built a fence on either side of the gate some days after. 

In his protest, the soldier insisted that the video was uploaded to social media without his knowledge and consent. 

Two days later, on November 21, he was summoned to answer for his behaviour before his superior, Lieutenant Colonel Edric Zahra.

Bombardier Schembri said he had explained that he had never authorised the sharing of that video, which he viewed as a joke. 

He had then been assured him that in case of an admission on his part, he would not risk being discharged.

Disciplinary proceedings over his alleged dangerous driving and inappropriate language had resulted in a conviction, based upon the soldier’s own admission, landing him with an extra 12 duty watches, a reprimand as well as the transfer to another company within the same regiment.

However, on November 23, Bombardier Schembri was summoned before Brigadier Jeffrey Curmi who told him that what he had done amounted to insulting and denigrating behaviour towards the army and he was being discharged.

READ: Military, ministry mum on bombardier’s ‘dismissal’ after video rant

In his judicial protest, the bombardier said the brigadier's decision went against army law and also breached his fundamental right not to be tried twice (double jeopardy rule.)

Moreover, the dismissal was both “discriminatory” and “unreasonable” since the joke had been intended to be shared in a private context, never to be made public.

The brigadier's action had also run counter to the principle of ‘fair hearing’ since, as the alleged target of the bombardier’s joke, he had chosen to take the matter into his own hands, “disciplining the person who had criticised him during the light moment.”

Such a decision certainly fell within the parameters of the law granting judicial review of an administrative act.

The bombardier said he was holding the army commander responsible for damages while calling upon him to reverse his dismissal.

Lawyers Joseph Giglio and Mario Spiteri signed the judicial protest.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.