He protected the whistleblower, hej
timesofmalta.com, earlier tonight
Muscat meets Police Commissioner over bribery allegations
Opposition leader Joseph Muscat said this evening that he had had a meeting with the Commissioner of police on the allegations of attempted bribery during the privatisation of the dockyard’s superyachts facility.
Speaking in a One TV interview, Dr Muscat said he had told the Commissioner everything he knew but he had protected the whistleblower.
“I do not play with people’s lives,” Dr Muscat said.
However, he added, it seemed that the prime minister was more interested in who had leaked the information, rather than what actually happened.
Dr Muscat said that it was very difficult to believe Dr Gonzi’s claim that he did not know of the allegations when they were made to his office in September.
His interest, Dr Muscat said, was to establish what had happened and the actions of the Prime Minister, the Finance Minister, and the General Secretary of the PN.
He protected the whistleblower? Honestly. That means he went to the police commissioner with a fine piece of detto del detto: “Somebody told me that X asked for money, but I’m not telling you who told me.”
Not much use to the police commissioner, is it?
More to the point, anyone at all can go to the police commissioner and make similar accusations: “Somebody told me but I can’t say who.”
Let’s be serious, please.
27 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
‘Protecting the whistleblower’ :di sieheb ta’ meta’ Mintoff kien jghid li sab l-informazzjoni fil-landa taz-zibel ta’ xi dipartiment tal-gvern.
U da kif l-informatur sar whistle blower?
Jista jkun li da l-informatur kellu xi interessi personali fix-xiri tal-yacht yard? Lil-Kummissarju ma’ jafdahx? Basta jaghmel naqra ‘shit stirring’.
Ara veru li skond iz-zokk il-fergha. Ma’ jinbidlu qatt.
This begs the question: Why did that ‘somebody’ not report this to the police directly? In any case, if this man is serious he would have given the police ALL the details, including the whistleblower’s details, otherwise he is just wasting police time.
As far as I know, the whistleblower has to report the alleged crime himself. Then the law has to protect this person. Third persons don’t come into it at all.
I don’t even want to imagine what will happen if they are in government. There will be no rules, no protocol, nothing. They will act according to their whims. And we will be back to old times – waking up in the morning and saying “Now let’s see what Joseph Muscat has dreamed of during the night.”
While I agree with you about the “old times,” you don’t have to go back that far. Times were also pretty surreal under Dr. Alfred Sant, whose less competent protege is Dr. Joseph Muscat.
The fictions sold to us [while Sant was in government] as “truth,” and the realities we were living then or threatened with afterwards [when Dr. Sant still demanded that we accept his worldview] provided the obligations for me to provide my public analysis of Sant.
If Sant in his authority was playing games with our lives like an adolescent lording over the surrounding adults, Muscat demonstrates such superficiality and immaturity as to suggest complete chaos in a future Muscat government, in a far shorter period [but with more devasting results] than the 22-months of the last Labour government.
cool comment !!
So he protects a whistleblower while with his blessings the Labour Council in Mosta persecutes a whistleblower. How consistent.
I am morally convinced that although the Labour spin has it as “Muscat meets the Police Commissioner…” it is more plausible that the facts were along these lines: “The Police Commissioner sent for Mr. Muscat to get a statement from him about his allegations about corruption…” with much of that script of the statement that needs so much correction afterward.
I hope the Police Commissioner did not have to resort to the Malta-Australia extradition accords to get Muscat back on time from Sydney for a statement. Although one could always blame Emirates for any delay.
Looks like he watched Bondi+ on Monday and took Gonzi’s advice, even only in a limited way.
He is more likely to have seen Bondi Beach on Monday, not Bondi+.
http://www.destination360.com/australia-south-pacific/australia/images/s/australia-bondi-beach.jpg
My friends, the whistle blower is Dr.Anglu Farrugia. He is not playing a whistle, but a brass trombone with a mewt. He has always been like that. The police know him more than we do. Joseph Muscat is a puppy and Anglu is very happy in this situation because he is a leader wannabe.
Riya, I imagined Dr. Anglu Farrugia playing one of these.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aThb251-Sk
!ncredible !ndia (that’s one Indian way to by-pass Daphne’s prohibition on exclamation marks).
!ncredible Anglu.
Inspector Gadget is not only a Leader wannabe but also a bully wannabe, the only problem is that he can only function when he’s surrounded by Labour thugs; well not always.
Troy, you bring up an interesting point. Where I come from the good ‘inspector’ would be called a ‘detective’ or, maybe ‘head detective’. Detectives are also, in street slang, called ‘dicks’.
Therefore our ‘inspector’ would be called the head dick. This term is usually reversed (on the street, again) to ‘dick head’. Seems to adequately describe our Anglu.
Il-whistle-blower bhalissa mghandux x’jiddefendih u ghalhekk Joseph ma jistax jikxfu. Rizzo bhala kummissarju u ex kap tad-DIK mghandux bzonn aktar informazzjoni. Kieku l-pulizija toqghod tistenna l-fatti, kieka mghandhiex bzonn investigaturi.
Tidhru mlebilbin biex tkunu tafu min qed jikxfilkom sormkom f’kull ma taghmlu.
If we alll went to report hearsay evidence to the Police Commissioner the poor guy would have to be at his desk 24/7.
Furthermore the queue of people waiting for their turn to report would stretch from Balzunetta to St Julian’s.
Finally if nobody divulges the name of his informant, at least, it would all be a sheer waste of everybody’s time.
It seems to me that whatever this Joey says invariably boils down to a load of hogwash.
Will he ever learn that not ALL his audience is made up of morons and that he should be reaching out to the few who are not?
“I do not play with people’s lives,” Dr Muscat said.
So what exactly were you doing when you lied about the European Union in the run up to the membership referendum? And just as if you did not get enough satisfaction out of your local lying spree fetish you went on to spread your glaring inadequacy on the Icelandic people!
Boy oh boy. This boy is beyond belief.
Welcome back il- cop
Little Joey bugs me more than King Kev of Brussels. Didn’t think it could happen.
One has to distinguish between mud slinging and whistleblowers.
With mud slinging, victory is destruction.
Mud slinging is described as “wild, unsubstantiated charges; a word, like ‘smear,’ used to turn an attack back on the attacker. ‘Calumniate! Calumniate!’ Some of it will always stick,’ advised Beaumarchais in ‘The Barber of Seville’ in 1775. This was based on ancient Latin advice, ‘Fortiter calumniari, aliquia adhaerebit,’ or ‘Throw plenty of dirt and some of it will be sure to stick.’ “Safire’s New Political Dictionary” by William Safire (Random House, New York, 1993). Page 471.
Whistle blowing is a concept accepted in advanced democratic societies and protected by law. Malta in the process of being included in this list. Such Act is meant to protect those who act courageously by exposing wrongdoing for the benefit of the general interest.
A US Court of Appeal ruled that “The whistle blower, acting in good faith, must at least show a reasonable belief that the matters disclosed showed a criminal offense is likely to be committed or a failure to comply with legal obligations”.
Not all whistle-blowers are untainted, of course. Some may be exacting revenge, or stirring up trouble for trouble’s sake. Hence the distinction between the two must be clearly and loudly identified.
This whistleblower issue is a double edged sword and has to be very, very carefully assessed. Simply stating that the whistle blower will be protected is NOT enough.
I would accept a whistleblower ONLy if he/she provides proof or directs the investigative arm to where the evidence of wrong doing can be found/traced.
Otherwise we wll turn into a nation of whistleblowers – half the population whispering to the police, or whoever, about the other half. I would even go further. If the whistleblower’s statements cannot be substantiated then he/she should face the full wrath of the law.
Look at the infamouse VAT fraud case. Names and details provided.. case resolved quasi instantaneously. Whether the net result was worth it or not is another issue.
Let us not get carried away with turning the population into a STASI society.
@edgar cayce
that is my point. thanks.
Eddie Fenech Adami didn’t even go to the police, he just met Zeppi l-Haffi and arranged a numbers of pardons. We never really learnt the true facts behind that attempted murder. Since you can get so much information from different government departments, I’m sure you can find the real truth. But maybe you will not publish it since it will not put PL in a bad light.
[Daphne – I know the real truth, Grace. (Is there such a thing as false truth?). And yes, you did hear the facts of the case, and if you missed them, you can look up the newspaper reports of the trial. But I imagine you were too keen at the time on getting your real truth from Manwel Cuschieri and Alfred Sant, who politicised the matter when it had nothing to do with politics and everything to do with cocaine-dealing.]
Yes it had something to do eocaine, still it was not the PMs job to investigate, meet and arrive to an agreement with Mr Fenech – He should have given the facts to the Police Commissioner and let do his job. That is what people like me believe, no matter what politicians from both sides of the political spectrum say. Surprise Surprise we are the ones who make all the difference.
[Daphne – It did not have ‘something’ to do with cocaine, Grace, but everything to do with it. Either research your facts thoroughly, instead of relying on Manwel Cuschieri, or keep quiet.]
So Josph spoke to the Commiss!
When? And if the Commiss believed one word Joseph uttered, why did the investigation not go to the PM’s office as the LP had stated that someone in the PM’s office had known about the alleged ‘asking for money’ in connection with the contract in question?
Nice try, Joseph, but as usual, you keep beating on an empty barrel.
@ Grace. If Manuel Cuachieri knew all tha facts he should have told Inspector Gadget. The case of Hafi is a serious case but at least with the intervention of Dr. Fenech Adami we came to know the facts. How come the Labour party did not do the same in the case of Lino Cauchi and Raymond Caruana? Inspector Gadget was still in the police force at that time.