Was I, as a historian, to make a quick assessment of the Police Corps, I would have to state that it started going downhill from the clash between Dom Mintoff and Police Commissioner Vivian de Gray. Corruption was not the cause for the disagreement between the two men; the issue was one of loyalty. Malta then was still a colony and Mintoff expected Police Commissioner de Gray to owe allegiance to him as Prime Minister of Malta. Despite the fact that de Gray was appointed by Mintoff, the Commissioner’s allegiance was squarely behind the British Governor as the ultimate head of Malta. In so doing, de Gray made a bold political statement: he was not going to tolerate any interference from politicians in the running of the police force
The story revolves around the famous or infamous riots of April 1958. From that point onwards, Mintoff never trusted de Gray who, quintessentially, was a civil servant. The relationship between Mintoff and de Gray was also researched by Eddie Attard. Most probably, Attard is the only researcher to have interviewed Mintoff on the subject. No doubt there is room for further research on the manner Mintoff administered the local Police Force. Tales of political favouritism and accommodation emerged in the press and are endless. When Mintoff won the elections in 1971, he removed de Gray and appointed Bencini. Bencini did not last long as he could not resist the political interference in the Corps' affairs. This was recounted by Bencini in his book “Nothing but the Truth”.
The situation improved with the change in Government in 1987. Police commissioners stopped being directly involved in the assassination or beating of detainees. It is a pity that some corrupt police officers got promoted after 1987 and honest ones, who had to stand alone to face Mintoff’s tantrums, were ignored and put aside.
But still, unless one wishes to study the inception years of blatant political interference by Thomas Maitland, the corps is again getting embroiled in too many controversial episodes of bad administration and corrupt practices. The Commissioner of Police has changed four times during this period and each time, the change seems to have been for the worse rather than for the better. We first had the removal of John Rizzo. It is normal for a Police Commissioner to be changed when there a change in Government; the only exception was Borg Olivier who kept de Gray, even if, the Nationalists did passively support Mintoff’s violent stand of April 1958. But no one imagined that the new Commissioner Pietru Pawl Zammit would become a source of political controversy that continued to drag on even after his removal.
Pietru Pawl Zammit began on the wrong foot. He decided not to prosecute John Dalli. If I am not mistaken, such a decision does not fall on the Police Commissioner as the Law vests such a responsibility on the Attorney General of the Republic. The Attorney General had to decide whether there was enough evidence against John Dalli or not. In fact, the dossier was sent to the Advocate of the Republic’s office. Pietru Pawl Zammit was replaced by Ray Zammit. Zammit too got embroiled in controversy; his son, an Inspector of Police, ended up in the news for the wrong reasons!
But the story does not rest there. We now have the fourth Commissioner, Michael Cassar who has gone out on extended sick leave. Initially the reason given was that Cassar was not comfortable with the creation of the new post of CEO within the Police Force.
Currently, the Police Commissioner enjoys the equivalent rank and salary of a Director General within the Civil Service. Above him are the Permanent Secretary and the Minister responsible for the Police. With the introduction of a CEO, all this would change. The Police Commissioner will be subject to the CEO. However, where criminal investigations are concerned, the Law will still continue to vest the power on the Police Commissioner and not the CEO, and no CEO can ever have the role of a Police Commissioner.
It should be noted that the creation of a CEO was in the pipeline before Cassar's appointment as Commissioner. Undoubtedly, he was aware of this and by accepting to become Chief of Police he was tacitly endorsing the new organogram. However, it seems that the real reason for Cassar’s sudden ‘resignation’ is to be connected to the Panama Papers. He was asked by the Malta Independent why he has not yet started to investigate the individuals whose name appears in the Panama Papers. He has since gone on indefinite sick leave.
The revelation of these secret trust funds has dragged Cassar into political controversy. He needs to explain why he has not yet started to investigate individuals whose names are in these papers. The question is very simple. I have no problem with individuals having trust funds, provided that the money deposited in these funds was earned from hard work and not from illicit activity.