Ever since the 1970s, the Maltese political firmament has been illuminated by lightening, often anticipating thunderstorms arising from allegations of corruption, criminality and abuse of power.

On most occasions, the allegations came from Opposition quarters. Although some of these allegations began to make the rounds sotto voce, very often they reached high pitch and characterised by vehemence.

Only rarely were people prosecuted, except for the small fry that is. Where there have been allegations of corruption and abuse of power, investigations were not distinguished by their transparency.

If, in fact, corruption had been detected, the criminals, and others who took advantage of their authority in the past, got off with their ill-gotten gains. When charges or allegations were made, causing some dust to be stirred up on the public stage, everything was forgotten after a brief flurry of interest either in the media or the public forum.

“Institutionalised” corruption

In l987, the Nationalist administration was elected to office on a promise that it would eradicate “root and branch” all traces of corruption, which was declared to have been “institutionalised”.

At that time, the administration was all fire and fury with charges of blatant corruption in the form of tixhim (bribery or sleaze).

A Commission against Corruption was set up. A long-winded inquiry into irregularities in the affairs of Mid-Med Bank – held behind closed doors from beginning to end – practically drew a blank.

In short, hardly a mouse emerged from the mountain, due exception being made to a handful of isolated cases, and to others where human rights infringements led to successful prosecutions. The rest was lost in the wash or allowed to evaporate by the law of prescription.

The succeeding Labour administration had made its own series of demands for investigations and inquiries when in Opposition. Energetic accusations were made and insinuations traded in Parliament and in the media. There was a campaign for a “whistleblower” law that would encourage citizens to report irregularities without fear of prosecution.

The Labour administration commissioned the late Dr Edgar Mizzi to investigate cases arising from charges of corruption or abuse of power. That assignment yielded no juice.

Cosy networks

There are laws as well as rules against palm greasing, sleaze and abuse of power. But it takes more than innuendo and repeated charges, no matter how vigorous, to bring suspects before the tribunal of justice.

In more recent years, the situation became even more problematic with the appearance of more and more quangos, more remote from parliamentary control than the average government department, and all allowing space for surreptitious decision-making and cosy networks.

Democracy needs more, not less, accountability.

The interests of democracy demand that accountability should not stop in Parliament. In cases of corruption and abuse of power, accountability acquits itself by reference to impartial judicial inquiries, held in public, or by outright reference to the courts.

In such cases, impartiality and transparency go together.

Politics will always provide a lot of leeway to those who wield power and exercise authority. Mutual back scratching has traditionally been the stuff of politics, and local interests will always find ways and means to grow fat by sleight of hand in an environment shielded from public gaze.

Abuse of patronage

Patronage rules, but it needs to be tamed in a democratic context. It becomes suspect if it is wielded clumsily or irresponsibly in favour of vested interests that expect a quid pro quo or more, in return for surreptitious donations. It is equally suspect if it surrenders to the avaricious demands of predatory politicians.

The best and most reliable antidote is a propensity for upright behaviour and candour. And this carries more weight when it comes from politicians in office rather than in opposition.

The media can play a vital role as watchdog of the public interest by taking investigative initiatives, by demanding the highest standards of rectitude from politicians of all shades, public servants and business interests alike. The media could, furthermore, align itself with the forces that fight against political arrogance and support the vulnerable citizens

Man’s frailty and the corrosive quality of power make explosive chemistry that is capable of blowing up democracy. Vigilance can wither on the vine, unless those in office take effective measures to assuage the popular thirst for justice and democratic rectitude.

The least one can do is to chase criminals who have never been pinned down and who have been allowed to feast on their ill-gotten gains under the very nose of scandalised public opinion.

[email protected]