Anglu Farrugia’s daughter continues to be in the news and this is happening simply because of her father’s position and political affiliations. Anglu Farrugia has belatedly denied categorically that he had anything to do with her appointment. This denial came after a local newspaper, which is very close to Castile, came up with the story that Anglu Farrugia’s daughter was offered the post as a sop for not having her father been given the post at the European Court of Auditors.
Anglu Farrugia’s statement is credible because I am sure that he is still eyeing local politics and is awaiting his turn - not far off - since Joseph Muscat’s movement is now clearly imploding.
This week’s reports confirm my previous analysis that there is not much love lost between Anglu Farrugia and Joseph Muscat. The appointment of Farrugia Frendo was not an act of reconciliation but a premeditated orchestration to inflict political damage on Anglu Farrugia and entice disgruntled Labour diehards back to the party.
Farrugia was eliminated from the political race, on the eve of the last election, to make room for Muscat’s anointed deputy leader, Louis Grech. Muscat was never happy with the choice of his deputies who were chosen after he got elected as leader. In the last three years, he ensured that both were side-lined. Of the two, Farrugia remained the hardest nut to crack since he can still join the local political fray in two or three years’ time.
On the other hand, Farrugia’s daughter is not interested in politics. She was not even interested in continuing in her father’s footsteps. Whether one likes Anglu Farrugia or not, one cannot deny that Farrugia has built up his law office against all odds and affirmed his reputation when Labour was in Opposition. Among other he successfully defended and proved the innocence of his client, who was accused with the attempted assassination of Richard Cachia Caruana.
Instead of reaping the fruits of her father’s successes, both in politics and professionally, Farrugia’s daughter opted for another job by becoming a court attorney. She was assigned to Madame Judge Lofaro. Farrugia Frendo’s new job has catapulted her into a new controversy. And I find the argument made that Farrugia Frendo is not eligible because of her work experience as court attorney as far-fetched. I hope that we do not have here “fumus persecutionis” by the PN for her father’s successful defence in the above-mentioned criminal case.
Had the argument been that Caroline Farrugia Frendo has not yet gained sufficient experience with Madame Lofaro, because she has only recently been employed in this job, then the argument would have made sense. But to say that the experience of working with judges does not qualify as part of the work experience needed to become a judge or a magistrate is one great stupidity. Irrespective of who is a candidate, any individual interested in working for judges should be given an added brownie point when being considered for the post of magistrate.
Unfortunately, our Justice Minister did not do justice to the controversy issue. Instead, he compounded the situation with his statements by saying that during the Nationalist administration, young lawyers too had been appointed magistrates. He specifically mentioned Noel Cuschieri, Silvio Demicoli and Jacqueline Padovani Grima. But why didn’t Owen Bonnici mention also Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera? She too was young when appointed magistrate by Alfred Sant.
I am sure that this whole controversy could have been avoided had there been the structures in place where lawyers interested in the post of judge or magistrate could apply. Therefore, I cannot but support the Opposition’s stand of pushing forward reforms in this area. It is in the government’s interest to support this reform. It would be a mistake if Labour adopts the same attitude of the PN, when it was in government, and tries to ignore these reforms. It is even more shameful if appointments are used to douse internal political unrest.
The possibility that Louis Grech quits politics and Anglu Farrugia attempts to return on the 11th district may be the reason for this whole charade. This would explain the need to put Farrugia in bad light by inventing that he wanted Toni Abela’s post. The real reason lies in the fact that should the 11th district seat become vacant, Labour prefers to see the vacated seat occupied by Alex Muscat than being regained by Anglu Farrugia. Alex Muscat currently is deputy chief of staff at the office of the Prime Minister. The biggest problem for Labour is its diehards who are now becoming restless towards the leadership of the Party in public, and need to be appeased.
This is why Labour was seeking to create a controversy around Anglu Farrugia. Whoever came up with such a cock and bull strategy was banking on the negative reaction of the Nationalists, which did not fail to arrive soon enough. But like the Gaffarena case, this issue too has slipped out of control thanks to the mistake that Labour committed with Ingrid Zammit Young, and which inadvertently put the whole strategy in bad light, emphasizing the image of “auri sacra fames”, as one of the readers of my blogs aptly defined it or that of a party in government with an accursed hunger for gold.