The director of prisons, Robert Brincau, is facing court proceedings. He has been charged with threatening an ambulance driver with a weapon last August. He is also accused of causing slight bodily harm, insulting and threatening the man, being armed during the commission of a crime, carrying an unlicensed firearm in public and breaching the peace.
In spite of these charges, Brincau retains his position as director of prisons.
When asked, Home Affairs Minister Byron Camilleri said that Brincau will not be suspended. There is a conflict between the version of events, and it’s up to the court to decide, Camilleri told MaltaToday. A decision will be taken after the court proceedings are concluded.
Last Saturday, the chief executive officer of the Malta Philharmonic Orchestra, Sigmund Mifsud, was charged with tampering with evidence after he allegedly instructed MPO employees to keep quiet on a sexual harassment scandal.
A few days earlier, a senior MPO official was given a suspended sentence after he admitted to having sexually harassed a young female orchestra musician over a three-year period. The man, whose name cannot be published by court order, was accused of harassing the young woman, subjecting her to an unsolicited act of physical intimacy, subjecting her to unwanted sexual behaviour and misuse of telecommunications equipment.
The culture ministry later said that in the light of the proceedings against Mifsud, he has been suspended on half-pay until the court case comes to an end.
We will not go into the merits of the two cases. Until court proceedings are concluded, both men are deemed innocent.
What we question is the different way the government dealt with the situation. Both of whom hold an important position in two institutions which fall under the government’s responsibility.
While Brincau was not suspended and continues to carry out his duties, Mifsud has been suspended and put on half-pay.
Why did the government choose to take a different stand on the two situations?
It may be argued that what Brincau is accused of doing did not happen in the course of his prison duties, whereas in the case of Mifsud, what he is accused of is linked to his post as MPO CEO.
That may be an important distinction, but it does not take away the fact that both men are facing serious charges. And both should have been treated in the same way. With the position they hold, they should have an impeccable record and any doubts must be eliminated before they should proceed with their work.
Just as much as the government sent an important message with the suspension of Mifsud until the court proceedings are over, it should have done the same thing with Brincau. The prison director should also have been suspended until the court deals with his case.
When people in top positions are facing serious charges, they should step aside until justice runs its course. In Brincau’s case, the message the government sent was the wrong one.