|
I cannot really blame the Commissioner of Police for not appreciating the role of the press. We come from different worlds. He lives in 1958, when editors such as Micallef Stafrace were imprisoned by the colonial government. I was under the impression that I lived in Malta today, three years since joining Europe.
I do not blame myself either, for having had to pinch myself whenever Rizzo addressed me in that holier than thou and patronising way, always starting his sentence with “habib” (friend).
I sort of still cherish memories of the police depot in Floriana in the eighties. I recall encountering the largish Rizzo at the depot every time I needed a permit for a protest.
Ironically, MaltaToday should be gratefully thanked by the Commissioner of Police John Rizzo. Without MaltaToday’s investigation on former Commissioner George Grech, he would never have been appointed to the position in the first place.
But if John Rizzo thinks that I will be calling it a day simply because he has instated a libel case against me, he can guess again. He will have to do more than cut off my tongue or hack off my wrist. It is my heart he will have to rip out to shut me up.
Incidentally, his libel comes a year after my door was burnt down. My home is situated just right in front of the police station in Naxxar. A year later, Rizzo’s police force has not been able to find out one relevant clue about the arsonists.
And now, the Commissioner of Police John Rizzo, Malta’s prime investigator, has turned to criminal lawyer Joe Giglio to defend him.
Instead of using government legal aid, he has turned to one of Malta’s top criminal lawyers. A lawyer who defends hardened and pitiless criminals has now the Commissioner of Police as his client. I don’t know. If you ask me, the whole episode says more about John Rizzo, than about Giglio: a gifted lawyer and an expert in cutting a swathe through police prosecutors.
But then, defending criminals against weak police prosecution is one kind of game. Trying one’s best to stop the press from expressing an opinion is a different sport altogether.
Tolerance of opinion makers in the small island republic of Malta is at its lowest ebb. The Home Affairs Minister has some questions to answer. I know it is difficult for him, but then again, until now it has been a very easy life for Dr Borg.
Does he approve of John Rizzo’s libel suit? Did he know anything about Rizzo’s intentions? Did he advise him? I hope for ours sins that this is the same Tonio Borg of 1987.
This saga about the Commissioner has everything to do with the infamous email by a celebrity chef to Michael Falzon, and the latter’s exaggerated outburst a week ago at the Rabat Labour party.
As an opinion writer I will continue to exercise my fundamental right to express my opinion. Three years after becoming a European Union citizen I feel more like a citizen of Zimbabwe.
When John Rizzo talks about law and order he sounds like someone from the Bible belt in the USA. He has of course missed the latest judgment about intolerance of the media in Malta by the European Court of Human Rights.
This is in my view the most serious libel suit ever instituted against me. We will fight this tooth and nail, and we will leave no stone unturned in defending the right to express our opinion.
This is a different case. It is a case about one’s right to disagree with any politician who decides to play God, and of a policeman to serve politicians in this way. Even if they have a legal right to do so, I will still criticise it.
When the Prime Minister asked John Rizzo to call in Frank Portelli to investigate his allegations of corruption at Mater Dei, he committed four fundamental mistakes.
First of all, he could have done without John Rizzo, and simply referred the matter to the Permanent Commission on Corruption. Or did the PM forget that something of the sort exists?
Secondly, he stupidly gave credence to Labour’s complaints, even though his parliamentary secretary Tonio Fenech had already told One News on tape that he did not see the need to follow through Frank Portelli’s allegations.
And third, he chose to confront Portelli, even though Portelli is more Nationalist than Lawrence Gonzi himself.
And lastly he did a Michael Falzon. He went to the Police Commissioner when Rizzo himself has the power to act without political prompting.
The problem with Frank Portelli’s allegations is that it is going to be very difficult to prove corruption at this massive hospital. Believing that corruption took place – as Frank Portelli does, and believe you me, he is not alone on this – is one thing; proving it is another thing altogether.
It is very much like believing in God. You can believe God exists as much as you like; but you cannot really prove it. Or can you?
Trying very hard to deflate the flak from the ills in the Labour party, Alfred Sant was reported as saying that the decision to stop the hunting season was an unjust U-turn. He could have simply said a just U-turn. After all, what’s so unjust about stopping hundreds of hunters from turning Malta and Gozo into the killing fields of the Mediterranean?
Echoing Sant’s declaration, enter Roderick Galdes, the MEPA employee who stands in as the MLP’s spokesman on the environment.
Roderick is more interested in scoring political points than going green. He sent me a short letter that will be published next Sunday reminding me that I was consultant to the Nationalist government and that I misquoted him.
I will save him some sweat and inform him here and now, that had it not been for me, we would have not reached the stage that hunting and trapping no longer takes place in Spring. I served Malta, not the Nationalists. And another thing: I had campaigned against hunting and trapping long before Roderick had ever imagined that he would be a spokesman on the environment. Should I be ashamed of this?
I sent Roderick a long list of questions about his stand on hunting, but Qormi-based Galdes snubbed my questions and suggested that I read some statement he was publishing together with Joe Brincat. My questions were the following:
The Times quoted Dr Galdes as saying: “The government decision to stop spring hunting would weaken its case when the EU takes its infringement proceedings to the next step. The Labour party would persist with the request to continue for hunting of two species.”
So I asked Roderick: “I take it that you will ‘persist’ by using the European courts? If not, how will you persist?”
I continued, “What new argument will you present when arguing for two species to be hunted in Spring?”
And I queried, “Will the Labour party be the only social democratic party in Europe to favour spring hunting in Europe?”
In his letter, Galdes said that the negotiations were flawed. I asked: “In what way were the negotiations with the EU on hunting flawed? Can you be specific?”
Then I turned to the thorny subjects. “Will you, if appointed Environment Minister, ensure that all lands taken over by hunters and trappers are returned to government?”
If he replied yes, I would transfer my residence to Qormi and give him my number one vote. “The position you are quoted as saying in The Times contradicts what was stated by Dr Alfred Sant in Xarabank some weeks earlier. Why is this?”
And finally I asked him about Joe Brincat, a vegetarian and someone who abhors hunting. “Is Dr Joe Brincat, who is your associate on the matter of environment in the Labour party, in full agreement with your present position?”
sbalzan@mediatoday.com.mt
|
