It is a good thing that the government has introduced ethics classes in state schools as several members of the government could do well with a refresher course, judging by the government's latest foray into the area.
As matters stand, it is hard to determine what's worse:the fact that the government's new Code of Ethics for members of Cabinet has significantly watered downministers' and junior ministers' transparency and accountability,or whether the government had beencovertly operating under a new set of ethics for a whole10 months unbeknownst to anyone else.
The Cabinet's supposedly new and improved Code of Ethics is dated August 2014 and, according to Principal Permanent Secretary Mario Cutajar, that new code hasbeen in force since then or soon after and its more stringentpredecessor was shelved and replaced. But the problem is that the government did not bother,for one reason or another, to inform anyone about thenew code despite several requests for updates on itsdrafting from the media.
Despite the fact that the new code had already enteredinto force, the justice minister had informed the mediaas recently as last March that the new code was to havebeen launched within a few days, conveniently concealingthe fact that it had already been written and that iswas even brought into force. To add insult to injury, hewas even quoted as having said in the same breath thatthe government was taking the issue of good governanceseriously.
The previous October, two months after it had been finalisedand presumably made operative, he said the codewould be published at an 'opportune' moment. The factthat the justice minister could make such statementsaimed at stalling the code's publication, despite the factthat it had already been finalised and brought into force,is utterly reprehensible. But it is not only the justice ministerwho should bear the brunt of the criticism; the criticismshould be democratically dispersed among all hisfellow Cabinet members. And despite the fact that the government had been presumably pressured into publishing the new Code ofEthics this week by the media, it was still reticent about making the document available to the public. To our knowledge, the code has not yet been published online for public consumption.
Journalists at this week's press conference unveiling thenew Code of Ethics were given hard copies (print outs)of the new code. But when later that day we reverted tothe office of the principal permanent secretary to requesta soft (digital) copy of the code, the curt answer was that'the hard copy would suffice'.
In the public interest, our newsroom scanned the entiredocument and uploaded it on our website.Before that press conference, it had transpired from atelevision interview with the head of the civil service thatthe government had seen it fit to do away with the previous Code of Ethics, penned back in 1994, which was aneasily accessible public document, and replaced it withits new and improved version which was withheld from the public until this week. It was only after media pressure that the government finally brought the new code tolight two days later. We had a situation in which the public was being assuredthat the Cabinet was never left without a Code ofEthics because once the new one was ready it enteredinto force and the old code was shelved. But while thepublic knew what the old rules were, the new rules hadbeen kept under lock and key.
The problem is that the country's government hadmade considerable changes to the Code of Ethics that itsleading members are bound to, but no one knew whatthey were actually allowed or not allowed to do anymoreas it had been reasonably assumed that the Cabinet wasstill operating under the old code. The fact that the government can bring into force a new Code of Ethics and not tell anyone what it consists of isnot only utterly reprehensible, but it makes a completemockery of what is supposed to be a 21st century democracy.The whole uproar behind the changes to the ministerial Code of Ethics came about when it was revealed in early2013 that former parliamentary secretary Franco Merciecahad been moonlighting and was still practising hisprofession as an ophthalmologist, which had been a clearbreach of the ministerial code drawn up in 1994.
At the time, the Prime Minister said that the Codewould be rewritten to better reflect today's realities. Ithas since been revealed that the code now specifies thatthe Cabinet has the authority to make exceptions to thisrule when deemed to be in the national interest. At least the public knew what was what, or it was atleast able to access the rules, with the old code having been publically available. But with the government having operated under a new and secret Code of Ethics, scrutiny of ministers' personal and professional dealings was all but removed for a good 10 months.This was completely unethical in itself and it belies acertain arrogance in the country's governance, which is afar cry from the tenets of good governance, transparencyand accountability that this government pledged itwould introduce if voted into power. By the looks of it,it has done quite the opposite.