Background to saga:
Richard Cachia Caruana: Head of KPMG Malta, Prime Minister’s personal assistant and now Malta's permanent representative to the EU.
Presidential Pardon to notorious thug and party foot soldier Zeppi l-Hafi.
Clarissa Cachia, wife of Kurt Cachia who with brother Steve Cachia are directors and run Deloitte and Touche Malta, more recently involved in laundering money for the Parmalat. Clarissa was found not guilty despite being arrested with one kilo of pure uncut cocaine.
Meinrad Calleja’s trial by jury
Zambi testimony is serendipity for Meinrad Calleja defence
Matthew Vella
Assessing the credibility of witnesses in Meinrad Calleja’s trial by jury has been the focus of both prosecution and defence in a week where a crucial testimony by convicted Carmel Attard ‘iz-Zambi,’ may have landed the Calleja defence team, led by Dr Emanuel Mallia, a bonus card.
Meinrad Calleja, 41, is pleading not guilty to having commissioned the attempted murder of the Prime Minister’s personal assistant Richard Cachia Caruana, stabbed outside his home in Mdina on 18 December 1994. Carmel Attard was sentenced to 14 years imprisonment in 1998 after pleading guilty to stabbing Cachia Caruana by Mr Justice Vincent Degaetano, who is presiding Calleja’s trial by jury.
Attard’s testimony has revealed accounts of coercion, fear, and new insights into the person of Zeppi l-Hafi, the notorious moniker of Joseph Fenech, grantee of the Prime Minister’s presidential pardon in return for disclosing the perpetrators of the attack on Richard Cachia Caruana.
Breaking a nine-year silence, Attard testified in Court this week that former co-accused Ian Farrugia, acquitted of stabbing Cachia Caruana, had told him it was Zeppi l-Hafi who had carried out the crime.
Describing him as a compulsive liar ("ma’ kull nifs jigdeb"), Attard said Fenech would spit at the Prime Minister’s Volvo whenever he passed by it outside the PM’s residence in Birkirkara, recalling Fenech saying he would continue doing so until Fenech Adami died. Attard said he was fooled ("laghabni kemm felah") and threatened by Fenech into accepting blame for the attempted murder.
Attard’s testimony at the hands of the prosecution’s interrogatory was serendipitous for defence counsel Emanuel Mallia, who did not counter-examine Attard.
Earlier on, Joseph Fenech recounted criminal endeavours in connection with Calleja, namely a 1992 burglary in Sliema and a botch drug exchange with Calleja’s sister Clarissa Cachia – both cases were foiled by the police. He recalled Calleja pestering him for two months to carry out the crime, and how he attempted to procrastinate matters since he did not want to kill Cachia Caruana, whom he knew.
In the end, Fenech recalled, he got a drunkard – Carmel Attard ‘iz-Zambi’ – to do a job he hoped would never be carried through, and he takes credit for that, since Calleja would have brought in an Italian killer to do the job.
In his counter-examination, Mallia has attempted to offer new directions into the complexity of the court process by attempting to discredit the prosecution’s case that Meinrad Calleja commissioned the murder in retribution for the resignation of his father, Brigadier Maurice Calleja.
Mallia’s counter-examination of Zeppi l-Hafi included questions on his relations with acquaintance Carmel Borg ‘is-Sunnara,’ the PM’s chauffeur, and Salvu Ellul of Elbros Construction, all three former minders who camped out on Fenech Adami’s doorstep during the violent eighties, protecting the then-Opposition leader from further attacks on his home.
A crucial point was perhaps when Mallia asked Fenech whether he was an acquaintance of building contractors, to which Fenech answered he knew some personally. It was a fleeting question, but why would building contractors feature in connection with the attempt on Cachia Carauna’s life?
Searching for ulterior motives besides retribution for Meinrad Calleja’s father’s resignation, allegedly driven by Richard Cachia Caruana himself, is leading the defence to offer new directions in which to explore the reasons for the attempted murder of the PM’s aide.
Not only is this meant to exonerate Calleja as mandate of the crime, but also to try and expose any form of falsehood on the part of Zeppi l-Hafi as past evidence is turned inside-out. In the case of the defence, Fenech was asked why he told Carmel Borg that he knew all about the attempt on Cachia Caruana’s life but only decided to speak to the Prime Minister months later. He was also asked why he had decided to go to the Prime Minister to reveal all that had happened in full knowledge that saying he had acted as middleman would have exposed him to prosecution. Why did he not go to the Police Commissioner in the first place?
And that is where Fenech’s presidential pardon is put into play. Was he aware of the pardon when he met Fenech Adami for the third time in a series of meetings in which the PM urged Fenech he reveal all and testify to the Court on what he knew? Fenech said it could have been mentioned during this particular meeting, although in other statements he said he had heard about the pardon on the evening news on his car radio, following police interrogation.
Would he have got the pardon for the pending drug charges had he not mentioned Meinrad Calleja as his mandate, Mallia asked? And Mallia stressed, it was convenient for Fenech to mention Calleja. If Fenech mentioned a building contractor instead, he might not have been granted the pardon on his pending drug charges, Calleja’s defence lawyer suggested. Mallia argued that if Fenech had identified somebody else other than Meinrad, Fenech might have received a pardon for the attempt on Cachia Caruana, but not on the drug charges which had also implicated Meinrad and his sister, Clarissa Cachia.
The Zambi testimony compounds two past statements: that of crime scene witness Nicholas Jensen, who said he recognised Zeppi l-Hafi as the perpetrator at Mdina during the trial by jury of co-accused Ian Farrugia, albeit never having recognised Fenech in previous identification line-ups; and Farrugia’s own statements that Attard had been half asleep in the car during the attack.
The contradiction in Zambi’s statements have already been exploited by the prosecution, with deputy Attorney General Silvio Camilleri stating that in 1996 Attard had added details to incriminate Joseph Fenech rather than shouldering the blame himself, as he was now claiming. Attard’s claims run counter to his original statements to the police back in 1996, a clear reversal of the events as he recalled them when he pleaded guilty of carrying out the attack on Cachia Caruana. Highlighting the contradiction, much can be said about Attard’s discrepant mess, and how credible he can prove himself to be in the face of these new statements.
The trial by jury is expected to continue tomorrow at 9am.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Irrefutable proof: Malta a European drug trade centre
Irrefutable proof: Malta a European drug trade centre
By David Lindsay
While the Maltese security service were busy listening to private conversations of John Citizen and Security Service Chief George Grech was facing serious allegations of sexual abuse by a former acquaintance, German and Italian vice squads were tracking Hamburg’s biggest ever drug find down to Malta.
Revelations in the German media lend evidence to the fact that Malta is serving as a redistribution centre for drugs from South America. It also proves that Malta police have been missing the wood for the trees.
While the Malta police have been blowing their bugles over catching youths with cannabis or a few ecstasy pills and believing that Malta’s drug barons are behind bars at Kordin, cocaine worth 46 million marks destined for the Italian market was being discovered in a container destined for the Malta Freeport.
The find included 514 kilogrammes of 90% pure cocaine and 25,000 ecstasy pills – representing a local market value of over Lm 20 million.
The plan, according to German investigators, was to use speedboats from Malta to ship the drugs to the Italian mainland. Such speedboats would have most likely been manned by Maltese individuals, considering the experience some Maltese have been shown to have in crossing the Sicilian straits under cover of night and at high speeds.
The federal criminal investigators in Germany were somehow tipped off that cocaine from Venezuela was being transhipped to Malta via Hamburg. There were 2,500 containers on the container ship Nedlloyd Kingston, which left the Venezuelan port of La Guaira on 17 December and arrived in Hamburg on 10 January. It later arrived in Malta on the 27 January.
The search carried out by the German and Italian police discovered 64 packages of the drug buried beneath 1,152 packs of work gloves at the rear of the container. The packages were hidden behind carbon paper, a practice that aims to render x-ray machines useless.
In a sting operation, investigators had removed the drugs and allowed the container to depart for Malta in order to apprehend those related to the case. It appears that this was done without informing the Maltese authorities. If this is the case, it confirms a degree of mistrust in the Maltese police and security services.
Later in September, up to 13 individuals were arrested in Naples in connection to the shipment. The operation is still being kept under wraps and it is not known whether the Maltese authorities will be approaching their Italian and German counterparts for further information.
By David Lindsay
While the Maltese security service were busy listening to private conversations of John Citizen and Security Service Chief George Grech was facing serious allegations of sexual abuse by a former acquaintance, German and Italian vice squads were tracking Hamburg’s biggest ever drug find down to Malta.
Revelations in the German media lend evidence to the fact that Malta is serving as a redistribution centre for drugs from South America. It also proves that Malta police have been missing the wood for the trees.
While the Malta police have been blowing their bugles over catching youths with cannabis or a few ecstasy pills and believing that Malta’s drug barons are behind bars at Kordin, cocaine worth 46 million marks destined for the Italian market was being discovered in a container destined for the Malta Freeport.
The find included 514 kilogrammes of 90% pure cocaine and 25,000 ecstasy pills – representing a local market value of over Lm 20 million.
The plan, according to German investigators, was to use speedboats from Malta to ship the drugs to the Italian mainland. Such speedboats would have most likely been manned by Maltese individuals, considering the experience some Maltese have been shown to have in crossing the Sicilian straits under cover of night and at high speeds.
The federal criminal investigators in Germany were somehow tipped off that cocaine from Venezuela was being transhipped to Malta via Hamburg. There were 2,500 containers on the container ship Nedlloyd Kingston, which left the Venezuelan port of La Guaira on 17 December and arrived in Hamburg on 10 January. It later arrived in Malta on the 27 January.
The search carried out by the German and Italian police discovered 64 packages of the drug buried beneath 1,152 packs of work gloves at the rear of the container. The packages were hidden behind carbon paper, a practice that aims to render x-ray machines useless.
In a sting operation, investigators had removed the drugs and allowed the container to depart for Malta in order to apprehend those related to the case. It appears that this was done without informing the Maltese authorities. If this is the case, it confirms a degree of mistrust in the Maltese police and security services.
Later in September, up to 13 individuals were arrested in Naples in connection to the shipment. The operation is still being kept under wraps and it is not known whether the Maltese authorities will be approaching their Italian and German counterparts for further information.
First company to operate from Smart City packs its bags before Smart City opens
Below follows an article about Atlas Technology Group quitting Malta. The article does not cover the full story - since the truth would be to0 difficult to print. However, an ex-employee of this company gave us the inside story.
AtlasTG chief, Minister Austin Gatt and Claudio Grech (Smart City CEO) at the launch on AtlasTG in Malta
Atlas Technology Group ultimately left Malta because they were fed up with being expected to pay huge sums of money to Icon, the company run by Gege Gatt, the son of the not so honorable Austin Gatt - head of the IT Ministry. They where also exasperated by the poor infratructure, internet outages, erratic power supply and to add insult to injury - the very high costs of these services. Difficulties in recruiting qualified people, and the expectation to employ political party stooges also did not help.
The CEO of Smart City is now Claudio Grech. Claudio qualification for the job is having been IT miniter's side kick for many years and its widely rumoured that Claudio and Austin may be on very intimate terms.
Articles follows:
The company that promised 600 jobs in the ICT industry and professed to be 'the first ICT corporation to publicly declare intention to be tenants in Smart City' packed its bags and relocated to the US a few days ago, before Smart City has even started hosting its first tenants.
Two years ago, Atlas Technology Group said during a press conference – addressed also by a boastful IT Minister Austin Gatt – that the company will be employing 600 in the Malta operation.
The company opened its headquarters in Malta in September 2006 employing 12 persons. The plan was to employ another 75 persons by end 2007 and the rest of the 500 employees when Smart City opens.
In the last week of August, the IT company shut its Malta operations with the headcount amounting to a dozen employees.
The closure of Atlas Technology Group went completely unnoticed with the IT Ministry, still headed by Austin Gatt, keeping a stony silence on the matter.
The only announcement was hidden in a release by AtlasTG published on Yahoo’s Biz news. In it, the company launched new software and said that “it has realigned the applications support staff to better serve the bulk of the current business, which is in North America.”
“The present customer base while requiring 24/7 support does not generate the volume of night time (US) workload to properly utilise the Malta support center. The company has closed the Malta support centre,” said AtlasTG
When setting its Malta centre, the company executive director, Robert Altinger said: "Atlas Technology Group wants to be one of the first ICT corporations to publicly declare our intention to be tenants in Smart City, where the presence of true state of the art communications infrastructure will give an enormous positive boost to our business.”
AtlasTG provides outsourced application software support services and software for clients with information technology functions worldwide. The company specializes in remotely supporting custom-built applications and networks using proprietary process, monitoring, and management systems.
In the press conference announcing AtlasTG operations in Malta on 19 September 2006, Minister Austin Gatt had said that: “Atlas’s reasons for choosing Malta confirmed that we [the government] have made the right choices over the past few years."
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The fox guarding the hen house
Pokerchamps, Betfair Scam
As you have read, last week Pokerchamps, a site owned by Betfair decided to close all U.S. Accounts and gave those customers 24 hours to withdraw their funds.Needless to say there are a lot of pissed off Americans and rightly so. It's still not know if this was a knee jerk reaction to the recent arrest of BetOnSports CEO David Carruthers, or if it has been in the works by Betfair.(here after referred to as BF as I can't bring my self to type the word "fair" when I refer to them any longer)BF purchased Pokerchumps back in November of 05 and had a policy in place at that time which excluded American accounts. This was a big concern by all Pokerchump's U.S. affiliates that had been working diligently to bring new players to the site since it's inception 2 years earlier. I am one of those in that boat. I spammed Party Poker so fiercely that they added pokerchamps.com to the word filter to deter my actions. Pokerchamps would never have gotten off the ground if it wasn't for the hard work of its affiliates.It was for this reason that the question was asked many times, "will we Americans be able to continue to play and will affiliate programs be affected by this purchase". We were told by the then CEO of Pokerchumps Tony G (poker pro) that we would be allowed to play and our affiliates programs would not be in jeopardy. This was also confirmed by BF card room manager Ben Fried (sounds like a joke, but that's his name) Tony has since come out and said he is sorry for what has happened. I assume this means he was not party to this and that BF had not planned to exclude U.S. accounts all along as they said in their account closing explanation.During the 24 hour time period given for us to get our money out, pokerchamps.com was conveniently not functioning properly and most players were not even able to access the cashier portion of the site to withdraw their money. Also many are now complaining that they can't even get a response to there e-mails in regards to this matter.Put your boots on because the shit gets even deeper. Many have suggested that players having problems cashing out should contact the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta which licences and supposedly regulates casinos under its jurisdiction such as Pokerchamps. Come to find out tho, Kevin Mikkelsen, who is calling the shots at Pokerchamps since Tony G left, is also on the board of directors of the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta. (read more) Tell me this doesn't stink of corruption and fraud. The fox guarding the hen house.I can only hope that the Justice Department get's wind of this and finds reason to put BF, Pokerchamps and the Malta Gaming executives on it's list of scumbags to prosecute. To any Europeans planning on playing at BF Poker be advised BF is also licenced by the lotteries and Gamming Authority of Malta. (read more)
As you have read, last week Pokerchamps, a site owned by Betfair decided to close all U.S. Accounts and gave those customers 24 hours to withdraw their funds.Needless to say there are a lot of pissed off Americans and rightly so. It's still not know if this was a knee jerk reaction to the recent arrest of BetOnSports CEO David Carruthers, or if it has been in the works by Betfair.(here after referred to as BF as I can't bring my self to type the word "fair" when I refer to them any longer)BF purchased Pokerchumps back in November of 05 and had a policy in place at that time which excluded American accounts. This was a big concern by all Pokerchump's U.S. affiliates that had been working diligently to bring new players to the site since it's inception 2 years earlier. I am one of those in that boat. I spammed Party Poker so fiercely that they added pokerchamps.com to the word filter to deter my actions. Pokerchamps would never have gotten off the ground if it wasn't for the hard work of its affiliates.It was for this reason that the question was asked many times, "will we Americans be able to continue to play and will affiliate programs be affected by this purchase". We were told by the then CEO of Pokerchumps Tony G (poker pro) that we would be allowed to play and our affiliates programs would not be in jeopardy. This was also confirmed by BF card room manager Ben Fried (sounds like a joke, but that's his name) Tony has since come out and said he is sorry for what has happened. I assume this means he was not party to this and that BF had not planned to exclude U.S. accounts all along as they said in their account closing explanation.During the 24 hour time period given for us to get our money out, pokerchamps.com was conveniently not functioning properly and most players were not even able to access the cashier portion of the site to withdraw their money. Also many are now complaining that they can't even get a response to there e-mails in regards to this matter.Put your boots on because the shit gets even deeper. Many have suggested that players having problems cashing out should contact the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta which licences and supposedly regulates casinos under its jurisdiction such as Pokerchamps. Come to find out tho, Kevin Mikkelsen, who is calling the shots at Pokerchamps since Tony G left, is also on the board of directors of the Lotteries and Gaming Authority of Malta. (read more) Tell me this doesn't stink of corruption and fraud. The fox guarding the hen house.I can only hope that the Justice Department get's wind of this and finds reason to put BF, Pokerchamps and the Malta Gaming executives on it's list of scumbags to prosecute. To any Europeans planning on playing at BF Poker be advised BF is also licenced by the lotteries and Gamming Authority of Malta. (read more)
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Malta: Foreign Ministry Lm40,000 in airline tickets
After waiting passively for three years...Gonzi asks Auditor: 'What happened to the John Dalli investigation?'
Kurt Farrugia Sat, 28 July 2007
After waiting passively for three whole years, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi wrote a letter to the Auditor General asking what happened to an investigation into the procurement of air tickets by the former Foreign Minister John Dalli, sources at the Office of the Prime Minister revealed.Auditor General Joseph G Galea’s term in office will effectively expire this week. But on Saturday 28 July it was announced that his term has been extended until a replacement is found. Meanwhile, it is still not yet known whether the Dalli report is concluded or not.
Gonzi’s dependability could be at stake depending on the outcome of the auditor general’s investigation into the air ticketing case.
A report in The Times on 9 June 2004 had alleged that all travel arrangements for the Foreign Ministry were made by a travel agency, Tourist Resources, in which members of the former minister’s family had an interest.
Among other issues, these allegations had led to John Dalli’s resignation.Gonzi has on various occasions went on record claiming that he accepted Dalli’s “offer” to resign because of case of the air tickets.But John Dalli, who had contested Lawrence Gonzi in the PN leadership battle, still claims he was forced to resign because of a fabricated report on another case in relation to Mater Dei hospital.
Ask the auditor general - John Dalli
Asked by maltastar.com whether he knew if the auditor general’s report was concluded, former minister John Dalli said: “I have no information about the said report. You would have to ask the auditor general about it.”
Various attempts to contact the auditor general on Saturday were not successful.
If the report finds no wrong doings in the procedures used by John Dalli to buy air tickets from Tourist Resources, then the million dollar question will gain added credibility: “Why has Gonzi sacked John Dalli from his Cabinet?”
In his short letter sent a few days ago – seen by maltastar.com sources at the OPM – the prime minister refers to the speech by the Leader of the Opposition Alfred Sant in Parliament on 18 June 2007, who also referred the auditor general’s unfinished investigation.
During the debate on a no confidence motion in Transport Minister Jesmond Mugliett, Alfred Sant had asked on which grounds the prime minister had accepted John Dalli’s resignation.
On a point of order the former minister said that the investigation by the auditor general had been going on for three years. “It is indeed shameful,” Dalli had said.
Gonzi-Dalli impromptu meeting
After the session Gonzi was seen approaching John Dalli and the two spoke for a few minutes. They were also seen heading to the Prime Minister’s office in Parliament.
It is believed that the subject of the impromptu meeting was the auditor general’s report. The outcome of which was the short letter to the auditor general.
maltastar.com is not informed whether the auditor general has replied to the prime minister.
Kurt Farrugia Sat, 28 July 2007
After waiting passively for three whole years, Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi wrote a letter to the Auditor General asking what happened to an investigation into the procurement of air tickets by the former Foreign Minister John Dalli, sources at the Office of the Prime Minister revealed.Auditor General Joseph G Galea’s term in office will effectively expire this week. But on Saturday 28 July it was announced that his term has been extended until a replacement is found. Meanwhile, it is still not yet known whether the Dalli report is concluded or not.
Gonzi’s dependability could be at stake depending on the outcome of the auditor general’s investigation into the air ticketing case.
A report in The Times on 9 June 2004 had alleged that all travel arrangements for the Foreign Ministry were made by a travel agency, Tourist Resources, in which members of the former minister’s family had an interest.
Among other issues, these allegations had led to John Dalli’s resignation.Gonzi has on various occasions went on record claiming that he accepted Dalli’s “offer” to resign because of case of the air tickets.But John Dalli, who had contested Lawrence Gonzi in the PN leadership battle, still claims he was forced to resign because of a fabricated report on another case in relation to Mater Dei hospital.
Ask the auditor general - John Dalli
Asked by maltastar.com whether he knew if the auditor general’s report was concluded, former minister John Dalli said: “I have no information about the said report. You would have to ask the auditor general about it.”
Various attempts to contact the auditor general on Saturday were not successful.
If the report finds no wrong doings in the procedures used by John Dalli to buy air tickets from Tourist Resources, then the million dollar question will gain added credibility: “Why has Gonzi sacked John Dalli from his Cabinet?”
In his short letter sent a few days ago – seen by maltastar.com sources at the OPM – the prime minister refers to the speech by the Leader of the Opposition Alfred Sant in Parliament on 18 June 2007, who also referred the auditor general’s unfinished investigation.
During the debate on a no confidence motion in Transport Minister Jesmond Mugliett, Alfred Sant had asked on which grounds the prime minister had accepted John Dalli’s resignation.
On a point of order the former minister said that the investigation by the auditor general had been going on for three years. “It is indeed shameful,” Dalli had said.
Gonzi-Dalli impromptu meeting
After the session Gonzi was seen approaching John Dalli and the two spoke for a few minutes. They were also seen heading to the Prime Minister’s office in Parliament.
It is believed that the subject of the impromptu meeting was the auditor general’s report. The outcome of which was the short letter to the auditor general.
maltastar.com is not informed whether the auditor general has replied to the prime minister.
Malta Government Authorities - endemic corruption.
Corrupt ADT employees salaries publishedMugliett's gift to corrupt ADT officials: Lm1,235 each
Kurt Farrugia Wed, 04 July 2007
Jesmond Mugliett’s intervention to stop the transport authority from sacking two of its officials convicted with corruption has cost the authority Lm2,470 in salaries since end of January.The roads minister admitted that in February he personally intervened to stop the ADT’s board from sacking the two corrupt officials, one of which was a canvasser of the same minister, pending a request for a presidential pardon.
A stand which does not make legal or political sense, especially when coming from a minister, political analysts commented.Roderick Galea and Jason Buttigieg were in November found guilty of taking bribes to give a pass mark to candidates taking driving tests. They were handed a general lifetime interdiction sentence which means they cannot hold public office ever. Their appeal was turned down in January 2007 but they were not sacked from ADT despite a board decision in that sense. It was later revealed that Jesmond Mugliett had personally intervened against the board’s decision.
Replying to a parliamentary question tabled by Labour MP Silvio Parnis, Mugliett said that the two corrupt officials who were suspended from ADT on half pay were paid Lm2940.81 each for the period June 2006-June 2007, when their job was actually terminated.Had it not been for Mugliett’s intervention to stop the ADT from terminating Galea’s and Buttigieg’s job, the authority would have been better off by Lm2,470.
In fact, an ADT board meeting early in February decided to terminate the job of its corrupt officials. But roads minister Jesmond Mugliett intervened directly to stop the ADT from sacking Galea (his canvasser), and Buttigieg.
For the period January 2007 (when the lifetime interdiction was confirmed) to June 2007, the ADT forked out Lm1235.45 each to the ADT officials.
Jesmond Mugliett had said that Roderick Galea was his canvasser and used to accompany him during campaigning in PN party clubs and home visits. Galea also used to take time off from work at ADT to drive Mugliett’s constituents to political activities organised by the minister.The attitude of the minister who interfered in favour of two corrupt officials was not yet denounced by the prime minister who is keeping dead silence on the matter.
The Labour Party demanded for the minister’s resignation, but the minister has not shown any intention of stepping down despite his scandalous political attitude in the ADT corruption scandal.
Kurt Farrugia Wed, 04 July 2007
Jesmond Mugliett’s intervention to stop the transport authority from sacking two of its officials convicted with corruption has cost the authority Lm2,470 in salaries since end of January.The roads minister admitted that in February he personally intervened to stop the ADT’s board from sacking the two corrupt officials, one of which was a canvasser of the same minister, pending a request for a presidential pardon.
A stand which does not make legal or political sense, especially when coming from a minister, political analysts commented.Roderick Galea and Jason Buttigieg were in November found guilty of taking bribes to give a pass mark to candidates taking driving tests. They were handed a general lifetime interdiction sentence which means they cannot hold public office ever. Their appeal was turned down in January 2007 but they were not sacked from ADT despite a board decision in that sense. It was later revealed that Jesmond Mugliett had personally intervened against the board’s decision.
Replying to a parliamentary question tabled by Labour MP Silvio Parnis, Mugliett said that the two corrupt officials who were suspended from ADT on half pay were paid Lm2940.81 each for the period June 2006-June 2007, when their job was actually terminated.Had it not been for Mugliett’s intervention to stop the ADT from terminating Galea’s and Buttigieg’s job, the authority would have been better off by Lm2,470.
In fact, an ADT board meeting early in February decided to terminate the job of its corrupt officials. But roads minister Jesmond Mugliett intervened directly to stop the ADT from sacking Galea (his canvasser), and Buttigieg.
For the period January 2007 (when the lifetime interdiction was confirmed) to June 2007, the ADT forked out Lm1235.45 each to the ADT officials.
Jesmond Mugliett had said that Roderick Galea was his canvasser and used to accompany him during campaigning in PN party clubs and home visits. Galea also used to take time off from work at ADT to drive Mugliett’s constituents to political activities organised by the minister.The attitude of the minister who interfered in favour of two corrupt officials was not yet denounced by the prime minister who is keeping dead silence on the matter.
The Labour Party demanded for the minister’s resignation, but the minister has not shown any intention of stepping down despite his scandalous political attitude in the ADT corruption scandal.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Comatose nation
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to another episode of ‘Hard Talk’: the popular television interrogation session in which we make it as “hard” as possible for our guests to “talk”, by constantly interrupting them the moment they are about to actually make their point. I’m your host, David Shutup, and tonight we will be making it hard for our guests to talk about the latest scanda… I mean, development, whereby Malta has finally overtaken Italy to the number one spot in the prestigious “C-Otto” list: i.e., the chart of Corrupt Nations which have done the most to stamp out correct practices wherever these occur.
That’s right, folks: according to the latest statistics released by EuroTwit – the official EU agency for idiotic observations – Malta boasts the lowest number of government departments and autonomous authorities to have never, ever been embroiled in any form of corruption scandal whatsoever. The same statistics also reveal that Malta has the lowest rate of corruption-related inflation – with traditional bribes taking the form of measly sums of money and at times even shopping bags full of basic groceries – making our country the cheapest destination for the would-be government corrupter.But before we all go patting ourselves on the back for a job well-botched, it would be worthwhile revisiting the dynamics of this momentous achievement.
After years of sporadic corruption cases – including the recent “Justicegate”, in which two senior judges were forced to resign over bribery allegations involving the paltry sum of Lm5,000 – Malta appears to have finally shed all pretence of integrity, and embraced its natural vocation as a “world centre for excellence” in corruption.This year alone, we have witnessed the re-emergence of a “cash-for-licences” scandal at the ADT (“Awtorita’ Dwar it-Tixhim”); a festering hub of corruption involving anywhere up to 800 dodgy maritime licences issued by the MMA (“Malta Mercenary Atrocity”); and now the latest – an apparent network of social services abuses, involving the very highest levels of authority within the Ministry of Wealth, and in which the going rate to secure one’s invalidity pension appears to be – I kid you not – one frozen chicken and a couple of skinned rabbits.
With us to discuss this apparent combustion of public trust in every single State institution is Professor L. M. Donor: an authority on endemic Maltese corruption, who paid us a very generous bribe of Lm175 to come onto the programme in the first place. Greetings, Professor. Can you tell us: just how difficult was it for Malta to become a centre for world excellence in corruption, anyway?“Actually, not as difficult as many Europeans might think. Part of the reason is because, unlike other countries where corruption is generally considered a crime, here in Malta it is actually grudgingly admired by a large section of the population; possibly even the majority…”
Are you trying to say that corruption is more accepted in Malta than elsewhere?“Absolutely. In fact, it is so widely acknowledged as the proper way to do things, that many people are unaware that certain practices even qualify as corruption to begin with. Consider, for instance, the famous ‘tangentopoli’ scandal in Italy in the early 1990s; or even the recent ‘cash for honours’ scandal in the UK, where prominent businessmen were ‘awarded’ seats in the House of Lords in return for massive donations to the Labour Party…”
Hang on: If I understood correctly, what you’re actually saying is that in Italy and the UK, certain businessmen made donations to political parties in return for contracts and/or positions of influence and power. If this is true… well… who cares? What’s the big deal? “Well, nothing, obviously. It’s what we in Malta have been doing now for generations. In fact, it’s difficult to imagine how business would even operate, if we had to legislate against secret donations to political parties, like ordinary countries did years ago. But you must remember we’re dealing with inferior European states here, some of which are so primitive that corruption is even against the law. So much so that in Italy, certain businessmen even committed suicide upon receiving an ‘avviso di garanzia’... instead of being awarded with the country’s highest honour, which is what probably would have happened here…”
So what you’re saying is, it’s “cool” to be corrupt in Malta…“Let’s just say that there’s nothing shameful about it. It’s normal. If anything, it’s doing things by the book that is frowned upon in Malta. Take the example of a man who has been working diligently in a government department for years, without ever having been visibly on the take. You will find that, instead of respecting him for his integrity, his own friends and family will privately refer to him as a ‘pastizz’. The same, charming little epithet will also be reserved for anyone who endangers the privileged status of corrupt businessmen and politicians by actually paying their taxes, or employing workers legally, or paying their employees’ social security contributions, or going through all the proper channels when applying for a permit…”
I see. Well, thank you, Past… I mean, Profs, but that’s about all the time we have reserved for intellectual nonsense this evening. And now, for our really important guest, who is none other than (pause for genuflection) the glorious and honourable Minister for Institutionalised Corruption and Fraudulent Policy in person, who very kindly consented to take time out of his busy, palm-greasing schedule to visit our humble studios.
Welcome, Minister, to Hard Talk. Before I begin: remember that brown envelope I mentioned over the phone earlier? Well, it’s right here under my desk… “Fine, just leave it on my chair the moment I get up to go at the end. Meanwhile, you can get off your hands and knees now…”
Thank you. But onto tonight’s subject. As the minister responsible for stamping out correctness wherever it raises its ugly head, do you feel vindicated by this latest recognition of your incredible achievements?“Yes. But I must concede that I was alone in bringing about this extraordinary success. Malta’s promotion to the upper ranks of European sleaze is the culmination of years – decades, in fact – of hard, painstaking work by succeeding administrations of government to instil in our country an innate corruption ethic in virtually every sphere of life. But it would be unwise to rest on our laurels at this stage. “So far, our policies appear to be bearing fruit. But despite all our efforts, public trust in State institutions has not been completely eroded yet. There remain some underperforming departments, in which there have either been no corrupt practices at all, or in which corruption has not been fully revealed as yet…”Is this the purpose behind the new Authority you’ve just established?“That’s right. The government I represent has long been a believer that public-private partnerships are the way forward to achieve our declared aim of 100 per cent corruption by 2010. With this in mind, we have just established the brand new Corruption Of Malta Authority (COMA), which amalgamates the worst of all autonomous authorities and bureaucratic government departments into one, stinking cess-pit of opaqueness and unaccountability…”
But what’s different between COMA and other authorities?“There are many differences. For one thing, COMA is the only authority in which board members are automatically screened for possible conflicts of interest. However, this does not mean that failure to have a conflict of interest would automatically preclude you from becoming a member of the board. Generally speaking, we allow board members a five-month ‘grace’ period, in order to procure themselves a conflict of interest in the very rare event that they don’t already have one of their own – either by engaging in a private practice in a way that is specifically prohibited by the Authority statute; or by getting married to the best friend of the wife of a government minister, responsible for the very process they themselves are theoretically overseeing. “Having said that, COMA is very much an equal opportunities institution: we employ all corrupt officers equally.”Has COMA received any complaints about unabusive practices at the workplace?“Yes, but thankfully only a few. At the moment we are investigating reports of a government department employee who allegedly refused to accept a bribe, as required by the Corruption Act 2005. At this stage, it is merely an allegation. But nonetheless we are taking it very seriously, as the possibility of a single honest government employee may hinder us from achieving our main target: zero tolerance for integrity by 2010.” As you yourself stated, Malta is well on its way to achieving full compliance with the EU’s Kickbacks Directive. What does this entail, exactly?“Quite simply, the total eradication of honesty and integrity from all aspects of the public service. In actual fact, this is more difficult than most people seem to think. For despite our best efforts in only recruiting employees with a long history of involvement in illicit affairs, it must be said that the occasional honest, bona fide civil servant still occasionally slips through the net. “For instance, during one of our routine anti-correctness inspections, we discovered that the document-shredding machine in a certain government ministry hadn’t been properly oiled in weeks. As a result, the department could only manage to shred half its quota of incriminating documents… and even then, the documents were only partially destroyed, leaving numerous fragments which could later be pieced together by inquisitive journalists. “I mean, honestly: how can we be serious in the fight against correct practices, when we can’t even rely on unscrupulous employees to shred documents properly?"So what new developments can we expect in the ongoing fight against correctness?“The most important piece of legislation currently in the pipeline is a new Whistleblowers’ Act. According to this new law, whistle-blowing – i.e., unfairly reporting perfectly legitimate corrupt practices to the relevant authorities – will be made a criminal offence, liable to up to 12 years of being forced to watch ‘Ta’ Horrox Borrox’ on Net TV, without possibility of parole… (unless, of course, the accused is willing to apply for a pardon like everybody else.) “And finally, after granting numerous contracts by direct order to leading canvassers from one specific constituency, we decided to open a new academy of corruption: “MCRAP” (The Malta College for Remuneration Against Presents), to be opened under the auspices of Malta’s dodgiest educational facility, the Foundation for Tomorrow’s Fools.”
Thank you, Minister, for being paid for your presence on Hard Talk. This is your host, David Shutup, and now it’s time for us to take a commercial break… don’t go away, we’ll be right back…
That’s right, folks: according to the latest statistics released by EuroTwit – the official EU agency for idiotic observations – Malta boasts the lowest number of government departments and autonomous authorities to have never, ever been embroiled in any form of corruption scandal whatsoever. The same statistics also reveal that Malta has the lowest rate of corruption-related inflation – with traditional bribes taking the form of measly sums of money and at times even shopping bags full of basic groceries – making our country the cheapest destination for the would-be government corrupter.But before we all go patting ourselves on the back for a job well-botched, it would be worthwhile revisiting the dynamics of this momentous achievement.
After years of sporadic corruption cases – including the recent “Justicegate”, in which two senior judges were forced to resign over bribery allegations involving the paltry sum of Lm5,000 – Malta appears to have finally shed all pretence of integrity, and embraced its natural vocation as a “world centre for excellence” in corruption.This year alone, we have witnessed the re-emergence of a “cash-for-licences” scandal at the ADT (“Awtorita’ Dwar it-Tixhim”); a festering hub of corruption involving anywhere up to 800 dodgy maritime licences issued by the MMA (“Malta Mercenary Atrocity”); and now the latest – an apparent network of social services abuses, involving the very highest levels of authority within the Ministry of Wealth, and in which the going rate to secure one’s invalidity pension appears to be – I kid you not – one frozen chicken and a couple of skinned rabbits.
With us to discuss this apparent combustion of public trust in every single State institution is Professor L. M. Donor: an authority on endemic Maltese corruption, who paid us a very generous bribe of Lm175 to come onto the programme in the first place. Greetings, Professor. Can you tell us: just how difficult was it for Malta to become a centre for world excellence in corruption, anyway?“Actually, not as difficult as many Europeans might think. Part of the reason is because, unlike other countries where corruption is generally considered a crime, here in Malta it is actually grudgingly admired by a large section of the population; possibly even the majority…”
Are you trying to say that corruption is more accepted in Malta than elsewhere?“Absolutely. In fact, it is so widely acknowledged as the proper way to do things, that many people are unaware that certain practices even qualify as corruption to begin with. Consider, for instance, the famous ‘tangentopoli’ scandal in Italy in the early 1990s; or even the recent ‘cash for honours’ scandal in the UK, where prominent businessmen were ‘awarded’ seats in the House of Lords in return for massive donations to the Labour Party…”
Hang on: If I understood correctly, what you’re actually saying is that in Italy and the UK, certain businessmen made donations to political parties in return for contracts and/or positions of influence and power. If this is true… well… who cares? What’s the big deal? “Well, nothing, obviously. It’s what we in Malta have been doing now for generations. In fact, it’s difficult to imagine how business would even operate, if we had to legislate against secret donations to political parties, like ordinary countries did years ago. But you must remember we’re dealing with inferior European states here, some of which are so primitive that corruption is even against the law. So much so that in Italy, certain businessmen even committed suicide upon receiving an ‘avviso di garanzia’... instead of being awarded with the country’s highest honour, which is what probably would have happened here…”
So what you’re saying is, it’s “cool” to be corrupt in Malta…“Let’s just say that there’s nothing shameful about it. It’s normal. If anything, it’s doing things by the book that is frowned upon in Malta. Take the example of a man who has been working diligently in a government department for years, without ever having been visibly on the take. You will find that, instead of respecting him for his integrity, his own friends and family will privately refer to him as a ‘pastizz’. The same, charming little epithet will also be reserved for anyone who endangers the privileged status of corrupt businessmen and politicians by actually paying their taxes, or employing workers legally, or paying their employees’ social security contributions, or going through all the proper channels when applying for a permit…”
I see. Well, thank you, Past… I mean, Profs, but that’s about all the time we have reserved for intellectual nonsense this evening. And now, for our really important guest, who is none other than (pause for genuflection) the glorious and honourable Minister for Institutionalised Corruption and Fraudulent Policy in person, who very kindly consented to take time out of his busy, palm-greasing schedule to visit our humble studios.
Welcome, Minister, to Hard Talk. Before I begin: remember that brown envelope I mentioned over the phone earlier? Well, it’s right here under my desk… “Fine, just leave it on my chair the moment I get up to go at the end. Meanwhile, you can get off your hands and knees now…”
Thank you. But onto tonight’s subject. As the minister responsible for stamping out correctness wherever it raises its ugly head, do you feel vindicated by this latest recognition of your incredible achievements?“Yes. But I must concede that I was alone in bringing about this extraordinary success. Malta’s promotion to the upper ranks of European sleaze is the culmination of years – decades, in fact – of hard, painstaking work by succeeding administrations of government to instil in our country an innate corruption ethic in virtually every sphere of life. But it would be unwise to rest on our laurels at this stage. “So far, our policies appear to be bearing fruit. But despite all our efforts, public trust in State institutions has not been completely eroded yet. There remain some underperforming departments, in which there have either been no corrupt practices at all, or in which corruption has not been fully revealed as yet…”Is this the purpose behind the new Authority you’ve just established?“That’s right. The government I represent has long been a believer that public-private partnerships are the way forward to achieve our declared aim of 100 per cent corruption by 2010. With this in mind, we have just established the brand new Corruption Of Malta Authority (COMA), which amalgamates the worst of all autonomous authorities and bureaucratic government departments into one, stinking cess-pit of opaqueness and unaccountability…”
But what’s different between COMA and other authorities?“There are many differences. For one thing, COMA is the only authority in which board members are automatically screened for possible conflicts of interest. However, this does not mean that failure to have a conflict of interest would automatically preclude you from becoming a member of the board. Generally speaking, we allow board members a five-month ‘grace’ period, in order to procure themselves a conflict of interest in the very rare event that they don’t already have one of their own – either by engaging in a private practice in a way that is specifically prohibited by the Authority statute; or by getting married to the best friend of the wife of a government minister, responsible for the very process they themselves are theoretically overseeing. “Having said that, COMA is very much an equal opportunities institution: we employ all corrupt officers equally.”Has COMA received any complaints about unabusive practices at the workplace?“Yes, but thankfully only a few. At the moment we are investigating reports of a government department employee who allegedly refused to accept a bribe, as required by the Corruption Act 2005. At this stage, it is merely an allegation. But nonetheless we are taking it very seriously, as the possibility of a single honest government employee may hinder us from achieving our main target: zero tolerance for integrity by 2010.” As you yourself stated, Malta is well on its way to achieving full compliance with the EU’s Kickbacks Directive. What does this entail, exactly?“Quite simply, the total eradication of honesty and integrity from all aspects of the public service. In actual fact, this is more difficult than most people seem to think. For despite our best efforts in only recruiting employees with a long history of involvement in illicit affairs, it must be said that the occasional honest, bona fide civil servant still occasionally slips through the net. “For instance, during one of our routine anti-correctness inspections, we discovered that the document-shredding machine in a certain government ministry hadn’t been properly oiled in weeks. As a result, the department could only manage to shred half its quota of incriminating documents… and even then, the documents were only partially destroyed, leaving numerous fragments which could later be pieced together by inquisitive journalists. “I mean, honestly: how can we be serious in the fight against correct practices, when we can’t even rely on unscrupulous employees to shred documents properly?"So what new developments can we expect in the ongoing fight against correctness?“The most important piece of legislation currently in the pipeline is a new Whistleblowers’ Act. According to this new law, whistle-blowing – i.e., unfairly reporting perfectly legitimate corrupt practices to the relevant authorities – will be made a criminal offence, liable to up to 12 years of being forced to watch ‘Ta’ Horrox Borrox’ on Net TV, without possibility of parole… (unless, of course, the accused is willing to apply for a pardon like everybody else.) “And finally, after granting numerous contracts by direct order to leading canvassers from one specific constituency, we decided to open a new academy of corruption: “MCRAP” (The Malta College for Remuneration Against Presents), to be opened under the auspices of Malta’s dodgiest educational facility, the Foundation for Tomorrow’s Fools.”
Thank you, Minister, for being paid for your presence on Hard Talk. This is your host, David Shutup, and now it’s time for us to take a commercial break… don’t go away, we’ll be right back…
Monday, May 26, 2008
The bastions have eyes
Security is the selling point of any video surveillance system. And yet, video surveillance is itself an abuse of public safety. Nowadays, cameras are being installed everywhere, be it for security reasons, or for parking taxes such as the CVA system introduced in the Park & Ride (or rather Park & Walk) system in Valletta. I just cannot understand how no one in this country has questioned whether the CVA system in Valletta is an infringement to the right to privacy. We talk about data protection, and yet we also allow cameras to video us every time we enter and leave Valletta. Can there be any doubt that this system is spying on our every movement while we are in the capital city? It is more reminiscent of KGB Russia than of a EU member state, because now we have the government authority spying on us on the pretext that it is monitoring the time we enter and leave Valletta in order to calculate the cost of parking. With the CVA system in place, the authorities will know our movements and our whereabouts. We are no longer free to roam around our capital city: if you were planning on holding a “low profile” meeting, do not hold it in Valletta. Likewise, if you had a date which you wanted to keep secret, do not make the appointment in Valletta because even if you use the Park & Ride system (assuming that you find a parking space) or you take a bus to Valletta, you will have cameras spying every movement you make in Valletta.Of course, the operators of this system will assure us that they will only use the video for taxation purposes. But a video is a video and you cannot pick and choose what you see or what you want others to see. So when you receive a photo of the number of your car and the date and times that you were in Valletta, that will be just part of the whole story they have in their hands.Everybody can install a security camera. Small and big businesses like cameras: it is a powerful tool, not just against customer theft but also for controlling employees. In this case it is understandable: they are using the cameras on their own premises and to control their staff and their business. But in the case of the CVA system monitoring Valletta, this was uncalled for because it implies an infringement of our privacy, and also because parking meters would have had the same effect, only without spying.So far, as I said, nobody has deemed these cameras to be an infringement of one’s fundamental right to privacy. In the meantime we have to ensure that cameras are not being abused. The devices are affordable and relatively easy to install. I was reading the other day that one system, for example, includes lightweight cameras that connect to a PC via home power lines. Whenever the cameras detect motion, the PC sends out an e-mail or text message, complete with embedded video. In 2006, two million units were shipped and it is estimated that the number will quadruple by 2011.In Malta there is still no regulation about the use of security cameras and to date we do not know how the CVA will dispose of the videos showing us entering or leaving Valletta. I am assuming that these videos will not be made available to third parties, even the police, because there is no law allowing them to do so. It is high time that some form of regulation is introduced in order to draw the fine line between security for security’s sake, and using security as an excuse for spying on people.We cannot allow the situation to get out of hand, and use the pretext of security to turn Malta into a police, or rather, a “security camera” state, in which everybody spies on everybody. The sooner some sort of regulation is introduced the better. I, for one, long to see the day when CVA cameras in Valletta are abolished and replaced by parking meters, thus giving the public the assurance that they are not being spied upon.Consumer organisations are still in abeyance as to what is actually going on in the world of security and it is a high time that they speak up in order to set consumers’ minds at rest that any video taken by the CVA or other security system in this country will not be used for extortion. I hope that we will not have a Vallettopoli in this country. Of course, you may tell me that extortion is illegal, but so far we have not had guarantees from the government and from the security organisations that they are bound by the confidentiality clause and will not utter a word of what they see on these videos.So, for the time being, it is free for all and everybody can install video cameras everywhere. A neighbour has every right to install a security camera to protect his property, but he has no right to use this camera to spy on his neighbours. I am already witnessing cases of people complaining that the security camera installed by their neighbour is focused in such a way as to spy on their movements and infringe their right to privacy. These cases are on the increase, and the sooner we do something about it the better because we cannot continue to live with cameras spying over us everywhere and without any form of control.
Constitutional crisisA couple of weeks of ago I wrote that the government was defying the Constitutional Court in the case of the Manoel Theatre restaurant and the two floors above.If this was not shocking enough, now we have both government and the opposition defying the Constitutional Court. In the case Galea Testaferrata Mario et noe vs Onor. Prim Ministru, the Constitutional Court held that it was unfair to deprive the direct owner of his right to receive the property back at the end of a temporary emphyteusis and declared some provisions in the law to be unconstitutional.But recent amendments to the law introduced by the government, and apparently approved by the opposition, completely ignore the ruling of the Constitutional Court, and instead propose that when the emphyteusis (cens) expires, the tenant will be given a real right over the dwelling house, thereby again effectively depriving the direct owner of his rights.There is definitely a Constitutional crisis in this country which everybody seems to be ignoring. I wonder if the Minister of Justice still lectures Constitutional Law at University…
Constitutional crisisA couple of weeks of ago I wrote that the government was defying the Constitutional Court in the case of the Manoel Theatre restaurant and the two floors above.If this was not shocking enough, now we have both government and the opposition defying the Constitutional Court. In the case Galea Testaferrata Mario et noe vs Onor. Prim Ministru, the Constitutional Court held that it was unfair to deprive the direct owner of his right to receive the property back at the end of a temporary emphyteusis and declared some provisions in the law to be unconstitutional.But recent amendments to the law introduced by the government, and apparently approved by the opposition, completely ignore the ruling of the Constitutional Court, and instead propose that when the emphyteusis (cens) expires, the tenant will be given a real right over the dwelling house, thereby again effectively depriving the direct owner of his rights.There is definitely a Constitutional crisis in this country which everybody seems to be ignoring. I wonder if the Minister of Justice still lectures Constitutional Law at University…
Israeli ‘spy’ firm trusted with eavesdropping in Malta
A major Israeli telecommunications company is to provide the Malta Security Services (MSS) the technology for its lawful interception system, in a controversial contract award which has landed the Malta Communications Authority in court.New York-based Verint Systems, a subsidiary of Comverse Technology, was chosen late December 2005 by the MCA to provide an interception system for the MSS.Concerns over the choice of Verint have sparked alarm over its parent company’s notorious link to a major espionage investigation after the September 11 attacks, raising eyebrows over the company that will have its eyes and ears on practically all Malta’s emails, and mobile telephony and VoIP exchanges.Rival bidder RCS, which presented the cheapest offer, is suing the MCA for having refused it an appeal on the contract decision. RCS’s interception equipment has been previously used in uncovering the recent Calciopoli fraud scandal which rocked Italy’s football scene.Among the list of witnesses that RCS’s lawyers have asked to testify over MCA’s tender process are the authority’s lawyer David Gonzi, Joe Demajo from the Demajo Group over the company’s relations with Verint, and Melanie Gonzi Balzan Demajo – wife to David Gonzi – to testify if she had ever offered any consultancy services to Verint, or whether she represented Verint in discussions with MCA.Parent company Comverse, which has close links to the Israeli government, was suspected to have been used by Israeli military spies who had been monitoring al Qaeda terror suspects prior to September 11, without informing the US government of their actions.Some of the spies, which had been working at Comverse, would have allegedly used the company’s interception system to tip off suspects of the actions of US counter-terrorism investigators.According to a report compiled by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), American intelligence services had serious concerns over the vulnerability of the computer equipment which provides interception systems for US lawmen.
According to the report, the system was prone to interception by unauthorised, non-law enforcement parties because Comverse had continued access to the system.And that’s why similar concerns are being expressed about Malta’s interception system which will be leased out by Verint, rather than sold, meaning the company will retain access to the computer systems so they can service the network and keep it free from glitches.Comverse was implicated in an espionage saga that received little attention in the US, except for the pursuit by Fox News and Le Monde, who reported the existence of a 60-page document suggesting that Israeli spies held information on the September 11 suspects which they did not share with the US.After the attacks in New York, more than 60 Israelis were detained by law enforcement agencies who broke a ring of military spies acting under cover of being “art students” who had targeted military bases, the DEA, FBI, secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel, claiming to be selling their “artwork”.But under investigation, many of them turned out to be young military officials specialising in military intelligence and electronic surveillance interception, including one bodyguard to the head of the Israeli army and even the son of a two-star Israeli general.Investigators suspected the Israelis had gathered intelligence about the September 11 attacks in advance, and not shared it with the US government.Le Monde said more than one third of the suspected Israeli spies had lived in Florida, where at least 10 of the 19 Arabs involved in the September 11 attacks also lived – the source of suspicions that the Israeli “students” had been tracking al Qaeda terrorists without informing the US government.About six of the 60 detained suspects worked for Comverse – and investigators feared information generated by this firm had fallen into the wrong hands and had the effect of impeding the September 11 terror inquiry.According to the DEA report, terrorist suspects had been tipped off about the actions of counter-terrorism investigators, who feared their own hunt for the suspects had been rumbled because their actions were known beforehand, by knowing when investigators are calling on the telephone.Suspicion fell upon Amdocs, an Israeli-based telecommunications company which has contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America. Amdocs practically generates a record on every single telephone call made in the US.The FBI had already conducted investigations on Amdocs over security breaches after it suspected that records of calls in the US were falling into the hands of Israel. Concerns about the vulnerability of the system operated by Amdocs grew because of a 1997 drug trafficking case in Los Angeles in which telephone information was used to compromise the communications of the FBI.Investigators feared that suspects may have been tipped off to what they were doing by information leaking out of Amdocs.But there was equal concern over Comverse, which was founded in Israel, and which provides the US government with its eavesdropping technology.Senior government officials were concerned that unauthorised non-law enforcement parties were obtaining access to the Comverse computer, and conducting their own unauthorised interception.That’s because Comverse had continuing access to the computers so they could service them. While this access made wiretapping easier, it led to a system that became vulnerable to compromise because Comverse programs could be intercepted by unauthorised parties.The suspicions however increased since Comverse works closely with the Israeli government, and gets reimbursed for up to 50 per cent of its research and development costs by the ministry of industry and trade.Counter-terrorism investigators started fearing that suspects they wanted to wiretap had been already been tipped off, and changed their telecommunications processes and act differently as soon as the supposedly secret wiretaps went kicked into action.The roots of the suspicions harked back to 1997, in the bust-up of a major Israeli organised crime network trafficking cocaine and ecstasy. According to investigators, criminals had access to a database through which they got the phone numbers of investigating officers, using them to avoid arrest.Investigators suspected Amdocs because it generates data for virtually every call in America, fearing the firm’s data was getting into the wrong hands.When investigators checked their own wiretapping system for leaks, they grew concerned about vulnerabilities in the computers that intercept, record and store the wiretapped calls – a main contractor was Comverse Infosys.
According to the report, the system was prone to interception by unauthorised, non-law enforcement parties because Comverse had continued access to the system.And that’s why similar concerns are being expressed about Malta’s interception system which will be leased out by Verint, rather than sold, meaning the company will retain access to the computer systems so they can service the network and keep it free from glitches.Comverse was implicated in an espionage saga that received little attention in the US, except for the pursuit by Fox News and Le Monde, who reported the existence of a 60-page document suggesting that Israeli spies held information on the September 11 suspects which they did not share with the US.After the attacks in New York, more than 60 Israelis were detained by law enforcement agencies who broke a ring of military spies acting under cover of being “art students” who had targeted military bases, the DEA, FBI, secret offices and unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel, claiming to be selling their “artwork”.But under investigation, many of them turned out to be young military officials specialising in military intelligence and electronic surveillance interception, including one bodyguard to the head of the Israeli army and even the son of a two-star Israeli general.Investigators suspected the Israelis had gathered intelligence about the September 11 attacks in advance, and not shared it with the US government.Le Monde said more than one third of the suspected Israeli spies had lived in Florida, where at least 10 of the 19 Arabs involved in the September 11 attacks also lived – the source of suspicions that the Israeli “students” had been tracking al Qaeda terrorists without informing the US government.About six of the 60 detained suspects worked for Comverse – and investigators feared information generated by this firm had fallen into the wrong hands and had the effect of impeding the September 11 terror inquiry.According to the DEA report, terrorist suspects had been tipped off about the actions of counter-terrorism investigators, who feared their own hunt for the suspects had been rumbled because their actions were known beforehand, by knowing when investigators are calling on the telephone.Suspicion fell upon Amdocs, an Israeli-based telecommunications company which has contracts with the 25 biggest phone companies in America. Amdocs practically generates a record on every single telephone call made in the US.The FBI had already conducted investigations on Amdocs over security breaches after it suspected that records of calls in the US were falling into the hands of Israel. Concerns about the vulnerability of the system operated by Amdocs grew because of a 1997 drug trafficking case in Los Angeles in which telephone information was used to compromise the communications of the FBI.Investigators feared that suspects may have been tipped off to what they were doing by information leaking out of Amdocs.But there was equal concern over Comverse, which was founded in Israel, and which provides the US government with its eavesdropping technology.Senior government officials were concerned that unauthorised non-law enforcement parties were obtaining access to the Comverse computer, and conducting their own unauthorised interception.That’s because Comverse had continuing access to the computers so they could service them. While this access made wiretapping easier, it led to a system that became vulnerable to compromise because Comverse programs could be intercepted by unauthorised parties.The suspicions however increased since Comverse works closely with the Israeli government, and gets reimbursed for up to 50 per cent of its research and development costs by the ministry of industry and trade.Counter-terrorism investigators started fearing that suspects they wanted to wiretap had been already been tipped off, and changed their telecommunications processes and act differently as soon as the supposedly secret wiretaps went kicked into action.The roots of the suspicions harked back to 1997, in the bust-up of a major Israeli organised crime network trafficking cocaine and ecstasy. According to investigators, criminals had access to a database through which they got the phone numbers of investigating officers, using them to avoid arrest.Investigators suspected Amdocs because it generates data for virtually every call in America, fearing the firm’s data was getting into the wrong hands.When investigators checked their own wiretapping system for leaks, they grew concerned about vulnerabilities in the computers that intercept, record and store the wiretapped calls – a main contractor was Comverse Infosys.
Silence on full extent of phone tapping
Malta’s telecommunications operators were conspicuous last week by their reluctance to reply to queries put forward by MaltaToday on the provision of equipment and data to the authorities.
Questions directed at the operators - Maltacom, Vodafone and go mobile – were answered by redirections to the Malta Communications Authority (MCA), in its capacity as the relevant authority.
The MCA last week confirmed that mobile telecom carriers are obliged to "…furnish to competent authorities the data and equipment needed to accomplish their lawful interception requirements…" as provided for in ‘condition four’ of their licences.
Asked to qualify and quantify the extent to which these activities are carried out by the operators, both Maltacom and go mobile were reluctant to comment, while Vodafone did not get back to MaltaToday .
As opposed to the requirements that have been placed on the telephony providers, licences issued to Internet Service Providers, "do not include conditions similar to those issued to mobile operators," according to the MCA.
The Authority adds, "With regard to telecommunications operators offering mobile, fixed telecommunications and cable services and systems, the licensing conditions, as detailed in the relevant legal notices, provide for such an inclusion."
Last week MaltaToday reported that the expensive equipment in question is given to the state gratis by the operators, as per their licences, and is based in Floriana in care of the secret service.
Additionally, the authorities’ practice of phone tapping has increased over recent months and the spectrum of targets has widened from that of only those involved in crime.
However, despite a hesitance to put their clients’ confidentiality at risk, telecom operators have no choice but to comply with the terms of their licenses by providing the secret service with specific client details and hi-tech surveillance technology.
Questions directed at the operators - Maltacom, Vodafone and go mobile – were answered by redirections to the Malta Communications Authority (MCA), in its capacity as the relevant authority.
The MCA last week confirmed that mobile telecom carriers are obliged to "…furnish to competent authorities the data and equipment needed to accomplish their lawful interception requirements…" as provided for in ‘condition four’ of their licences.
Asked to qualify and quantify the extent to which these activities are carried out by the operators, both Maltacom and go mobile were reluctant to comment, while Vodafone did not get back to MaltaToday .
As opposed to the requirements that have been placed on the telephony providers, licences issued to Internet Service Providers, "do not include conditions similar to those issued to mobile operators," according to the MCA.
The Authority adds, "With regard to telecommunications operators offering mobile, fixed telecommunications and cable services and systems, the licensing conditions, as detailed in the relevant legal notices, provide for such an inclusion."
Last week MaltaToday reported that the expensive equipment in question is given to the state gratis by the operators, as per their licences, and is based in Floriana in care of the secret service.
Additionally, the authorities’ practice of phone tapping has increased over recent months and the spectrum of targets has widened from that of only those involved in crime.
However, despite a hesitance to put their clients’ confidentiality at risk, telecom operators have no choice but to comply with the terms of their licenses by providing the secret service with specific client details and hi-tech surveillance technology.
Secret Police State in Malta Enacted
Over the past few weeks MaltaToday has raised a number of questions on the workings of Malta’s Secret Service headed by Police Commissioner George Grech. The questions are grounded in the simple fact that the Maltese law was copied from a similar law in Britain, however with grave omissions on the accountability aspect.
After reviewing both sets of legislation MaltaToday found that the British equivalent of the Security Services Act provided for greater accountability and scrutiny of the Secret Service. It seems that Maltese lawmakers decided to omit important parts from the British law when it was transposed to the local context.
The British Security Services Act 1989 sets out a number of mechanisms to ensure proper accountability and control of the Service and its work. Similar to the Maltese Secret Service, Britain’s MI5 is under the authority of the Secretary of State also known as the Home Secretary, which is equivalent to our Home Affairs Minister.
MI5 is led by a Director General who is appointed by the Home Secretary. The Director General is personally responsible the operations and efficiency of the Service and must brief the Home Secretary on threats to national security and economic well being.
The Home Secretary is briefed by the Director General on major current investigations and has a close knowledge of the most sensitive aspects of the Service's work. Warrants allowing the Service to intercept letters or telephone calls, or to interfere with property are personally authorised by the Home Secretary.
Similarly, in Malta the procedure to authorise warrants is vested with the Home Affairs Minister or the Prime Minister.
Considering the secretive nature of the Service, British lawmakers saw fit to introduce three independent structures – the Commissioner, the Complaints Tribunal and the Intelligence and Security Committee - to ensure a system of checks and balances.
The role of the Commissioner according to the British law is to review the Secretary of State’s exercise of the function to issue warrants. This is a similar role to the one enjoyed by the Commissioner in Malta’s Security Services Act.
However, the difference lies in the person occupying the post. The British law states that the post must be occupied by ‘a person who holds or has held high judicial office’, thus ensuring independence from government. This is similar to Malta’s law with exception to a clause stating that if the post is not appointed it will automatically be filled by the Attorney General. Having the Attorney General occupy such a post is a questionable aspect. It must be pointed out that the Attorney General represents government and assists the police in court cases and therefore is not independent from government.
However, more serious than this is the fact that the Maltese Commissioner – not to be mixed up with the Police Commissioner – is the person vested with investigating any complaints made by the public about the Secret Service. British lawmakers created a separate body, the Complaints Tribunal, to handle complaints about interception or misconduct. Maltese legislation does not talk about an independent tribunal.
The Tribunal is distinct from both the Home Secretary and the Commissioner and consists of three senior members of the legal profession appointed by the Head of State - the Queen, which in our case would mean the President of the Republic - for a five-year period. The Tribunal may visit the Service and examine its records as necessary as well as question MI5 staff.
The third safeguard found in the British law relates to the Intelligence and Security Committee. This committee has the role to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Security Service. It is composed of nine parliamentarians who are appointed by the Prime Minister in consultation with the Leader of Opposition. None of the Committee members may be a minister.
In complete contrast the Maltese equivalent, the Security Committee is composed of the Prime Minister, the Home Affairs Minister, the Foreign Affairs Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. It must be noted that the Committee is entrusted to examine the policy of the Secret Service. However, there is a conflict of interest between the dual roles of both the Prime Minister and the Home Affairs Minister. They are the people responsible for authorising warrants and they also sit on the Security Committee, responsible for overseeing the actions of the Secret Service.
The MI5 official web site states that the controlling mechanisms ‘have been considered and endorsed by the European Commission on Human Rights in a number of applications under the European Convention on Human Rights arising out of complaints to the Security Service Tribunal.’
In addition, the web site states that the MI5 does not have an executive role. The Security Service is a ‘civilian organisation and its officers have no executive powers, such as the authority to detain or arrest people.’ The web site points out that the MI5 is not a 'secret police force', although it shares its information with the police or other law enforcement agencies when there is a prospect of arresting criminals.
In Malta, this distinction may be blurred considering that the head of the Security Service is also the Commissioner of Police. Legal sources have pointed out that the two roles are of a conflicting nature. It is unclear whether Malta’s Secret Service describes itself as a ‘civilian organisation’ with no executive powers, like the MI5. But if it is so than there is definitely a problem with having the Police Commissioner – an executive role – occupying the post of head of the Secret Service.
The MI5 web site can be found on the following address: http://www.mi5.gov.uk/index.htm
After reviewing both sets of legislation MaltaToday found that the British equivalent of the Security Services Act provided for greater accountability and scrutiny of the Secret Service. It seems that Maltese lawmakers decided to omit important parts from the British law when it was transposed to the local context.
The British Security Services Act 1989 sets out a number of mechanisms to ensure proper accountability and control of the Service and its work. Similar to the Maltese Secret Service, Britain’s MI5 is under the authority of the Secretary of State also known as the Home Secretary, which is equivalent to our Home Affairs Minister.
MI5 is led by a Director General who is appointed by the Home Secretary. The Director General is personally responsible the operations and efficiency of the Service and must brief the Home Secretary on threats to national security and economic well being.
The Home Secretary is briefed by the Director General on major current investigations and has a close knowledge of the most sensitive aspects of the Service's work. Warrants allowing the Service to intercept letters or telephone calls, or to interfere with property are personally authorised by the Home Secretary.
Similarly, in Malta the procedure to authorise warrants is vested with the Home Affairs Minister or the Prime Minister.
Considering the secretive nature of the Service, British lawmakers saw fit to introduce three independent structures – the Commissioner, the Complaints Tribunal and the Intelligence and Security Committee - to ensure a system of checks and balances.
The role of the Commissioner according to the British law is to review the Secretary of State’s exercise of the function to issue warrants. This is a similar role to the one enjoyed by the Commissioner in Malta’s Security Services Act.
However, the difference lies in the person occupying the post. The British law states that the post must be occupied by ‘a person who holds or has held high judicial office’, thus ensuring independence from government. This is similar to Malta’s law with exception to a clause stating that if the post is not appointed it will automatically be filled by the Attorney General. Having the Attorney General occupy such a post is a questionable aspect. It must be pointed out that the Attorney General represents government and assists the police in court cases and therefore is not independent from government.
However, more serious than this is the fact that the Maltese Commissioner – not to be mixed up with the Police Commissioner – is the person vested with investigating any complaints made by the public about the Secret Service. British lawmakers created a separate body, the Complaints Tribunal, to handle complaints about interception or misconduct. Maltese legislation does not talk about an independent tribunal.
The Tribunal is distinct from both the Home Secretary and the Commissioner and consists of three senior members of the legal profession appointed by the Head of State - the Queen, which in our case would mean the President of the Republic - for a five-year period. The Tribunal may visit the Service and examine its records as necessary as well as question MI5 staff.
The third safeguard found in the British law relates to the Intelligence and Security Committee. This committee has the role to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Security Service. It is composed of nine parliamentarians who are appointed by the Prime Minister in consultation with the Leader of Opposition. None of the Committee members may be a minister.
In complete contrast the Maltese equivalent, the Security Committee is composed of the Prime Minister, the Home Affairs Minister, the Foreign Affairs Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. It must be noted that the Committee is entrusted to examine the policy of the Secret Service. However, there is a conflict of interest between the dual roles of both the Prime Minister and the Home Affairs Minister. They are the people responsible for authorising warrants and they also sit on the Security Committee, responsible for overseeing the actions of the Secret Service.
The MI5 official web site states that the controlling mechanisms ‘have been considered and endorsed by the European Commission on Human Rights in a number of applications under the European Convention on Human Rights arising out of complaints to the Security Service Tribunal.’
In addition, the web site states that the MI5 does not have an executive role. The Security Service is a ‘civilian organisation and its officers have no executive powers, such as the authority to detain or arrest people.’ The web site points out that the MI5 is not a 'secret police force', although it shares its information with the police or other law enforcement agencies when there is a prospect of arresting criminals.
In Malta, this distinction may be blurred considering that the head of the Security Service is also the Commissioner of Police. Legal sources have pointed out that the two roles are of a conflicting nature. It is unclear whether Malta’s Secret Service describes itself as a ‘civilian organisation’ with no executive powers, like the MI5. But if it is so than there is definitely a problem with having the Police Commissioner – an executive role – occupying the post of head of the Secret Service.
The MI5 web site can be found on the following address: http://www.mi5.gov.uk/index.htm
The threat of Malta’s Secret Service
It is not only the tapping of domestic land-based and cellular phones that are organised by the Maltese Secret Service, but also covert activities, senior police sources have told MaltaToday. These clandestine operations have led one to believe that the Maltese Secret Service might be perpetrating unacceptable activities which are out of their legal framework.
The officers, who are irked with the heavy handed behaviour of the Secret Service, allege that there have been operations involving a break in on at least one occaision.
MaltaToday can also confirm that the tapping of phones has taken place widely and does not only include individuals from the criminal world but politicians, journalists and even members of the judiciary.
Worse still, pressure has been placed on the existing local mobile communication companies to provide details of their clients. There have been occasions in the past when the Secret Service has been provided with specific details of clients.
Traditionally, abroad, mobile companies have been reluctant to divulge information to the police for fear of reprisals from their client base.
MaltaToday has documents proving that such information is made made available to the S.S."No one is safe," we were told at 11pm at night in a deserted spot. "The only thing that cannot be screened at this stage are SMS messages."
The police officers, who were petrified at being discovered recounted to MaltaToday a number of serious allegations which if remotely true, could have serious ramifications.
Confirmed by MaltaToday is that the phone tapping instrumentation being used by the Secret Service is one of the most sophisticated in use and according to investigations can pick up 14 different calls at any one time. It is based at Floriana.
The Secret Service is run by Police Chief,George Grech, who is also Commissioner of Police. He runs operations together with the Office of the Prime Minister and is assisted by an officer who attempts to keep a low profile, Superintendent Godfrey Scicluna.
Members of the Secret Service may be contracted from out of the police corps. They are usually on renewable contracts.
MaltaToday is aware that there are at least three sergeants working within the Secret Service and they use a green Hyundai and a white Fiat Uno. However, at times, they also leased cars. It is not known at what level the Secret Service has the backing of the Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister, but it appears that not all operations are sanctioned by the senior politicians and the covert operations are not known to the two politicians.
Asked some weeks ago about tapping, the Home Affairs Ministry refused to comment.
Last week, MaltaToday referred to the souring of relations between George Grech and Home Affairs Minister, Tonio Borg. The reaction to the story was followed by a string of meetings confirming the strain between the two men.
In most European Union countries, the activities of the Secret Service are disliked and preyed upon by the press.
But in Malta some elements of the press actually work from tip offs from the Secret Service, as was the case three weeks ago when confidential documents appeared in one prominent newspaper.
And tapping of phones has traditionally raised serious concern from civil liberty lobbyists who view the free hand of any secret service as a serious threat to human rights.
The officers, who are irked with the heavy handed behaviour of the Secret Service, allege that there have been operations involving a break in on at least one occaision.
MaltaToday can also confirm that the tapping of phones has taken place widely and does not only include individuals from the criminal world but politicians, journalists and even members of the judiciary.
Worse still, pressure has been placed on the existing local mobile communication companies to provide details of their clients. There have been occasions in the past when the Secret Service has been provided with specific details of clients.
Traditionally, abroad, mobile companies have been reluctant to divulge information to the police for fear of reprisals from their client base.
MaltaToday has documents proving that such information is made made available to the S.S."No one is safe," we were told at 11pm at night in a deserted spot. "The only thing that cannot be screened at this stage are SMS messages."
The police officers, who were petrified at being discovered recounted to MaltaToday a number of serious allegations which if remotely true, could have serious ramifications.
Confirmed by MaltaToday is that the phone tapping instrumentation being used by the Secret Service is one of the most sophisticated in use and according to investigations can pick up 14 different calls at any one time. It is based at Floriana.
The Secret Service is run by Police Chief,George Grech, who is also Commissioner of Police. He runs operations together with the Office of the Prime Minister and is assisted by an officer who attempts to keep a low profile, Superintendent Godfrey Scicluna.
Members of the Secret Service may be contracted from out of the police corps. They are usually on renewable contracts.
MaltaToday is aware that there are at least three sergeants working within the Secret Service and they use a green Hyundai and a white Fiat Uno. However, at times, they also leased cars. It is not known at what level the Secret Service has the backing of the Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister, but it appears that not all operations are sanctioned by the senior politicians and the covert operations are not known to the two politicians.
Asked some weeks ago about tapping, the Home Affairs Ministry refused to comment.
Last week, MaltaToday referred to the souring of relations between George Grech and Home Affairs Minister, Tonio Borg. The reaction to the story was followed by a string of meetings confirming the strain between the two men.
In most European Union countries, the activities of the Secret Service are disliked and preyed upon by the press.
But in Malta some elements of the press actually work from tip offs from the Secret Service, as was the case three weeks ago when confidential documents appeared in one prominent newspaper.
And tapping of phones has traditionally raised serious concern from civil liberty lobbyists who view the free hand of any secret service as a serious threat to human rights.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Malta Smart City
Paul Gatt, one of the two sons of Austin Gatt, the minister holding the portfolio for Communications and National Projects, is expected to be nominated as Governor of Smart City, a campus sized collection of buildings that is being constructed in Malta’s otherwise derelict south. The other son of Austin Gatt, Gege, is also a lawyer and also one of the owners and directors of Icon Studios. Icon Studios has also made great contributions to the development of ICT in Malta, in part through its exalted and exclusive access to the policy makers and government contracts.
The Gatt family is not the only family in Malta that has dedicated itself to the greatness that is Malta today. Mario de Marco, son of President Emeritus Guido de Marco, is one of the new faces in the 2008 cabinet and is looking forward to continuing the good work of his predecessors. Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, son of another President Emeritus, Ugo Mifsud Bonnici, was entrusted with the Ministry of Home Affairs and Justice in the new cabinet, after serving as parliamentary secretary in the same ministry in the previous legislature. One of the sons of Dr. Fenech Adami, the current president is also expected to play an active and important role in this new government. One must not forget the prime minister himself Dr. Lawrence Gonzo, nephew of the late Archbishop Gonzi, a person known for his militant defense of church privileges and the enshrining of Roman Catholic values in the country’s laws.
And smart city is not the only feather in the Malta’s hat. The new hospital is now finally finished, with a price tag of EUR600 million; no mean feat for a country with barely 400 thousand inhabitants. This hospital was originally budgeted for EUR110 Million.
While the current government was elected with a slight margin of 1,500 votes, foreigners often comment on how the people they talk too are generally staunch supporters of the ruling party. This may be in part due to the exclusion of those who are not loyal to the ruling government. In any case the lack of any serious voice of dissent makes Malta a tranquil and attractive place for foreign investment.
The two main newspapers Times of Malta and Independent are both staunch government supports as are other sources of media such as those controlled by the Roman Catholic Church; the only voice of discontent comes from Malta Today a small and marginalized newspaper. This paper still manages to punch above its weight though, such as the recent exclusive revelation that a family man had not voluntary jumped from the bastions walls to his death while trying to escape from the police head quarters, a story that had somehow escaped the media coverage in Malta.
So blessed with the wisdom of generations, the ruling elite now have a vision for Malta as becoming one of the main international centers for ICT. This small nation may yet one day become a serious challenge to Silicon Valley.
The Gatt family is not the only family in Malta that has dedicated itself to the greatness that is Malta today. Mario de Marco, son of President Emeritus Guido de Marco, is one of the new faces in the 2008 cabinet and is looking forward to continuing the good work of his predecessors. Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, son of another President Emeritus, Ugo Mifsud Bonnici, was entrusted with the Ministry of Home Affairs and Justice in the new cabinet, after serving as parliamentary secretary in the same ministry in the previous legislature. One of the sons of Dr. Fenech Adami, the current president is also expected to play an active and important role in this new government. One must not forget the prime minister himself Dr. Lawrence Gonzo, nephew of the late Archbishop Gonzi, a person known for his militant defense of church privileges and the enshrining of Roman Catholic values in the country’s laws.
And smart city is not the only feather in the Malta’s hat. The new hospital is now finally finished, with a price tag of EUR600 million; no mean feat for a country with barely 400 thousand inhabitants. This hospital was originally budgeted for EUR110 Million.
While the current government was elected with a slight margin of 1,500 votes, foreigners often comment on how the people they talk too are generally staunch supporters of the ruling party. This may be in part due to the exclusion of those who are not loyal to the ruling government. In any case the lack of any serious voice of dissent makes Malta a tranquil and attractive place for foreign investment.
The two main newspapers Times of Malta and Independent are both staunch government supports as are other sources of media such as those controlled by the Roman Catholic Church; the only voice of discontent comes from Malta Today a small and marginalized newspaper. This paper still manages to punch above its weight though, such as the recent exclusive revelation that a family man had not voluntary jumped from the bastions walls to his death while trying to escape from the police head quarters, a story that had somehow escaped the media coverage in Malta.
So blessed with the wisdom of generations, the ruling elite now have a vision for Malta as becoming one of the main international centers for ICT. This small nation may yet one day become a serious challenge to Silicon Valley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)