Man with tampered meter wants police to investigate Enemalta chairman

Lawyers for Enemalta’s executive chairman Frederick Azzopardi have requested that a court grant them permission to intervene in challenge proceedings which would force the Commissioner of Police to prosecute him.

Anthony Camilleri was found to have a tampered electricity meter and had elected to go for an administrative procedure whereby he agreed to pay a fine rather than face criminal proceedings.

However, when he did not pay the fine, Enemalta disconnected his electricity supply in accordance with the agreement.

Camilleri then filed a criminal complaint, requesting that the police proceed against Enemalta for ‘ragion fattasi’ (taking the law in one’s own hands). When the police declined to prosecute Enemalta, the man filed challenge proceedings against the Commissioner of Police. The challenge, if ratified by the court, would force the police to prosecute Azzopardi for “exercising a pretended right”.

Before Magistrate Aaron Bugeja this morning, Azzopardi’s lawyer Stefano Filletti argued that the Enemalta chairman had a right to intervene, or at the very least, make submissions in the case because he could potentially face criminal proceedings as a result of them. Once the court was going to hear the submission of the complainant and have access to the same information as the Commissioner of Police, it followed that Azzopardi had a right to be heard, argued the lawyer.

He added that accusing a public official of taking the law into their own hands whenever they exercise powers granted by law would only serve to weaken the office he holds.

But lawyer Joseph Mifsud contested this assertion, arguing that the person about whom the challenge is made is not a party to the proceedings, but against the Commissioner of Police.

If the third party has a right of audience in challenge proceedings, he must then be notified, argued Mifsud. However, Magistrate Bugeja pointed out that a right to be notified notwithstanding, if the third party is made aware of challenge proceedings it would have a right to participate.

Earlier in the sitting, a representative from Enemalta’s meters section testified how on 26 June 2010, an employee had been sent to change the old meter at a Zurrieq house to a smart meter. The worker said he found the meter to have been tampered with. “He had asked me what we could do, so I told him that there was a procedure where he could sign a declaration that he had tampered with the meter and pay a fine. Camilleri and I signed the declaration on the spot. Because he had accepted to settle, I did not make a police report.”

The case continues in November.