|
Various letters and articles have been written lately in the local media questioning the criteria being used by our law courts in deciding whether or not to publish an accuser’s name in the press especially in criminal cases. To us, the ordinary people, it just seems that we are just helpless spectators witnessing these strange happenings where only the small fry are named whilst others seem to be offered anonymity which recalls the saying all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.
The recent story of the Sliema banker, a cousin of a well known politician who stands accused with fraud, forgery and misappropriation of money, is working for another big financial institution after resigning his post. The manager who helped him cash the money still holds the post with the same bank, yet the court in its wisdom ordered that the accused or the bank where he worked should not be named.
I used to think that people in certain banking ranks obtain a warrant or license, so how does one move from one bank to another financial institution after such accusations? Who should look into these matters? What about the bank’s disciplinary section? Where does the MFSA fit in all this?
Is this a conspiracy of silence? One of the political party’s media is enveloped in complete silence over this matter. Who is keeping everyone on hold? Will one of the main banks come forward and put the client’s mind at rest that it is not within their ranks that we find such unscrupulous fraudsters? Or are the banks’ main concern the protection of their good image and maybe dispense with wrongdoers by giving golden handshakes?
The Italians have one word for all this – ‘Omertà’ – the mafia code of honour requiring silence about criminal activities, a criminal conspiracy of silence. In the meantime the victims suffer in silence.
Edward Sultana
Gwardamangia
|
