Robert Abela abused public funds for a sponsored Facebook post promoting himself. The guidelines on government advertising are clear - “adverts should not include names or photos of Ministers”.  Abela breached those guidelines. Even Abela’s own Standards Commissioner, Joseph Azzopardi categorically declared that Abela’s sponsored post “does not conform with the guidelines since the Prime Minister appears in it”.

But then the acrobatics started. Commissioner Azzopardi couldn’t possibly declare Abela in breach. His desperate attempts to exonerate Abela are simply comical.  “This Office insists on the validity of the guidelines but it is the opinion of this office that this videoclip does not fit the dispositions of the guidelines because the video was not produced purposely for the advert”.

So according to the Commissioner, Abela’s video, which Azzopardi himself concluded had breached the guidelines, didn’t in fact breach the guidelines because it wasn’t filmed specifically for the sponsored Facebook post. Could Azzopardi find a more ridiculous excuse for letting Abela off the hook?

The Commissioner decided that although the guidelines clearly state that publicly funded adverts should not include images of ministers, as long as those images (or videos) are not produced specifically for the purpose of that advert then it’s just fine. The Prime Minister and all of his Ministers can now plaster their faces onto promotional adverts funded by our money as long as they simply reuse photos or videos produced for other purposes - Silvio Schembri could use his wedding photo, Chris Bonnett could use a video of his trip to Sicily in his official car. How can the Commissioner show face? Has he no shred of self-respect?

“This is simply a videoclip of an interview with the Prime Minister,” the Commissioner commented in his mad rush to defend his patron. “The public has a right to be informed of the outcome of such meetings,” he added. He just repeated verbatim what Abela told him in his reply.

Abela defended his shameless abuse of public funds by claiming that the material published was of public interest.  He insisted the public has a right to be informed and that government has a duty to inform.

That doesn’t mean Abela has the right to abuse our money to boost his profile through sponsored posts that manifestly breach the guidelines. He’s got the DOI to issue press releases.  He’s got a Government of Malta official Facebook page where he can upload all the information he wishes.  Anybody remotely interested in what inanities Abela said after his Prague meeting could look it up.  Abela didn’t have to abuse his office and misuse public funds to “inform the public”.  He didn’t have to ram it down our throats with sponsored posts popping up on our screens. Yet all the Commissioner could do was parrot Abela’s defence.

The Commissioner bizarrely concluded Abela wasn’t in breach of ethics because information provided was of public interest and…..wait for it……”the expenses involved in broadcasting his interview were minimal”. The Commissioner decides whether ethics have been breached on the amount of money squandered. If it didn’t cost so much, then it’s OK, for Joseph Azzopardi. What standards is this Standards Commissioner using? These are standards of the gutter. Don’t worry, you didn’t steal that much, it’s fine, Azzopardi concluded.

Azzopardi bent over backwards to try and justify his somersaults. “This interview cannot be considered with the same measure as a video produced specifically for the advert, where the producers have free choice as to its production and who appears in it,” he waffled. “Besides if a similar video had to be produced to broadcast the same information without the involvement of the Prime Minister, more money would probably have been spent. This would not have made sense,” the Commissioner’s report read. Azzopardi meanders into pure speculation, tying himself up in knots. Should we be grateful because Abela didn’t squander more of our money than he actually did?

Abela didn’t have to use our money to upload a sponsored post. It just wasn’t necessary.  He didn’t need another video clip. It was clear even to Azzopardi that Abela breached the guidelines.  But the Standards Commissioner is totally craven, completely beholden to Abela. Azzopardi owes Abela his post and his monthly pay cheque. That’s the only reason he’s groveling so obsequiously to his master. He’s sold his honour.

Abela knows he’s got the Commissioner under his thumb. That’s evident in the contemptuous tone of his reply to the Commissioner. “It is crystal clear that these informative videos do not breach the Ministerial Ethics Code,” he arrogantly declared.  It’s not up to Abela to make that call - that’s the Commissioner’s job. “I consider the complaint frivolous,” Abela commented disdainfully.

Abela then turned on the complainant, Arnold Cassola. Abela accused him of frivolity (frivolozita’) and descending into “the absurd”. He denounced him for “using the Standard Commissioner’s office to paralyse the government from delivering its work, as it is obliged in a democracy”.  He arrogantly lectured the Commissioner about his role - “It is not the role of the Commissioner to indirectly legislate but it is simply to apply the law as it is, without using guidelines to give it meaning beyond established rules”.

He even instructed the Commissioner on what he should decide.  “The two complaints should be rejected (“rigettati” - literal translation: vomited) and declared frivolous,” Abela ordered. The Commissioner slavishly obeyed. Instead of putting Abela in his place and exercising his autonomy, Azzopardi proceeded to bend the rules beyond recognition to comply with his master’s orders and absolve him.

The Standards Commissioner concluded his report in what has become the standard ending to practically every report he’s issued: “This Office has decided there is no basis for this complaint to be investigated. This document represents a decision not to conduct an ulterior investigation and not a report about the outcome of an investigation.  Therefore this document will not be published by this office”.

Indeed, if it weren’t for Arnold Cassola, Azzopardi would have buried the report with all the others.