Tag: police

Categories
Mediawatch

The Psychologist Police

asbo_akkuzaAfter The Castille MEPA Protest Man we now have The Aggressive St Paul’s Bay Man. I apologise for the weird titles but it seems that this kind of tag is here to stay – we actually have the media ‘tagging’ the poor Kazakh woman who was guilty of participating too enthusiastically in a local festa as The Bikini Dancer (incidentally you have to love how the Times URL  places the title just after the “local” tag in so very much “A League of Gentlemen Fashion”).

My problem today is not about this recent unconscious fad of media tagging that in a way resembles archaeological findings such as Cro-Magnon man and the like. Rather it is about the worrying increase of reports of the police recommendations that persons under arrest be seen to by a psychologist in what seem to be a rather heavy handed manner of dealing with (possible) anti-social behaviour.

In the case of Mr Busuttil of the Castille MEPA Protest I have already spoken about how the resort to psychologists was an extremely worrying case of the police resorting to a Catch-22 scenario that stinks of heavy handed bullying and silencing of anybody with a gripe with the Prime Minister (see Arrested Development). In the case of Mr Snedden we have once again heard reports of the police requesting psychological assistance for an arrested person as seen here in a Malta Independent report:

The police declined to comment for the time being since investigations are still ongoing and a court case being heard. The prosecuting inspector , Godwin Scerri, however did state in court that Mr Sneddon has a bad temper and is a danger to himself and society and should be seen by a psychologist. He also said that Mr Sneddon was injured in a separate incident before the incident ensued between the accused and the police.

I stand by Jason Azzopardi’s position on this particular situation – particularly if the alleged rough-handedness by the police did take place. The issue of the police increasingly insisting on psychological assistance (and we do not know how often this is resorted to since we can safely assume that other cases are not reported) is worrying.

In Mr Busuttil’s case we saw warning signs of dangerous methods that threaten the safety of persons accused of committing a crime during the period of their arrest and detention. The introduction of psychologists who are prepared to sign on the dotted line and commit a person to a mental institution based on a suspicion by the men in blue is extremely worrying and  to say the least.

Without getting too technical we are talking here of the writ of habeas corpus – an institution in criminal law designed to safeguard the personal freedom of an individual even when criminal proceedings are being held against him.  Much noise has surrounded the rights of arrested persons (particularly their right to be assisted by a lawyer) in the run up to the last elections and we have heard much about the great legal reforms being undertaken to improve the laws.

Meanwhile however, the police seem to be relying on the psychological excuse all too often. Mr Busuttil’s case was a flagrant abuse of this factor. If the police advice were to be  followed in Mr Snedden’s case we are entering dangerous territory. Why? Well, Mr Snedden is not the first and by my guessing nor will he be the last to engage in a violent reaction when confronted by the police. Without justifying his reaction at all it should be the case to examine how such persons are dealt with.

If anything what we are facing here is not an extreme solution that tends to deal with persons in the haphazard “off to Mount Carmel” approach – or risks getting them off the hook (if they are guilty) with a few sessions at the psychologist of choice. It may be time to explore the UK road of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. Cases of violence when confronting public officers are most times a question of behaviour and upbringing.

The ASBO is in itself an attempt at legally defining a behavioural trait – as can be seen in the UK definition:

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 defines anti–social behaviour as acting in a manner that has “caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household” as the perpetrator.

Of course exploring this avenue is one part of the solution. Unfortunately the comical approach to upholding the law that is evidenced in cases such as that of the poor Kazakh woman, or over-reactions to cases of nudity by the beach for example – do nothing to strengthen the trust that is needed in the police force in doing their work.

Jason Azzopardi’s appeal for an inquiry must also be followed up by a thorough review of the police forces education and role in the process of arrest, detention and prosecution as well as by an examination of the possibility of introducing the concept of ASBOs in our legal system. My biggest concern as to the latter is that there are so many examples of Anti-Social Behaviour in this country that one would not know where to start enforcing it. Still, time is ripe for debate – and above all keep us away from those psychologists.

Categories
Citizenship Drugs

Playing that Criminal Record

criminal_akkuzaThere’s an item in the news about the Earth Garden concert. The article title is “DJs ‘humiliated’ by police at Earth Garden Festival“. This is one of those instances where you have to wonder what the quote marks around the word humiliated are intended to convey. Is it sarcasm? Irony? Is the journalist taking the piss out of the DJs and saying that they are making a mountain out of a molehill?

I’ll leave you to guess about the employment of quote marks by the Times journalist on this occasion. What is more interesting, and worrying, is the existence of a policy that is being applied by the police in these circumstances with regard to the line up of DJs. So, from what I gather, when you apply for a permit to have a concert such as Earth Garden (in this day and age when people are paid commissions by government to look for garages for performing artists to practice in – coz we iz cool and with it) your line up of DJs gets vetted for any “priors”. If what the organisers said is true then apparently even a minor crime (I’m assuming possession) that dates over 20 years is sufficient for the long arm of the law to strike you off the list. I am also assuming that no such vetting occurs for the other people emplpyed for this concert – the barmen might have just finished their latest stint in Kordin, the cleaners might be on parole and there is (I am still assuming) no quick check up at the door to ensure that all concert goers have a clean bill on their social conscience.

If at face value (yeah Prima Facie) this is not already a ridiculous state of affairs in your mind then just put it all in context. This kind of attitude is a clear demonstration of our society’s lax and arbitrary attitude towards any sense of justice and equity. Policies such as this might (and I stress the might) have a place within a comprehensive program of – let me see – drug dissuasion. But is there one? What is the national policy on Dj’s and their role in concerts? Is there one? Has a spin doctor within the Taghna Lkoll government noticed the potential niche market and come up with some new groundbreaking “social legislation” to add to The One We Allowed the Puffs to Marry, The One We Made Being Gay Legal and The One We Introduced Social Security. (Warning, Irony and sarcasm might damage your brain)?

Not yet it seems. So the branch of the law that most randomly interprets policy and the rule of law decides to suddenly make even the most minor of infractions hidden back in time a huge handicap for DJs. yep. Just DJs. All this while the Prime Minister of the Republic openly embraced a convicted criminal and proudly declared him a soldier of steel. Mixed messages? Who cares? We work in niches and pigeon holes. Even far from the political rhetoric there is something very worrying about the haphazard way that we go about creating, applying and interpreting our laws and policies. The man in the street cannot be blamed for having a skewered view of the law and all that pertains to it.

Cause the police always got somethin stupid to say
They put out my picture with silence
Cause my identity by itself causes violence – N.W.A. (includes O’Shea Jackson a.k.a Ice Cube, Andre Romelle Young a.k.a Dr Dre)

This is the country that hosts the Isle of MTV and will (rightly) close an eye for performers such as Snoop Dogg yet small-time DJs will be struck off the list. A video about FIFA and its corruption is making the rounds – it mentions how in Brasil alcohol consumption was illegal in stadia until FIFA obliged Brasil to make it legal to accomodate main sponsor Budweiser. It is this kind of inconsistency that makes a mockery of any social and legal system. Policies are meant to be created and used with real social purposes. The law should not simply be a toy for bullying selectively and making a mockery out of citizen rights.

The law – the rule of law – is essential to the fabric of society. It can erode slowly and gradually but the ultimate implosion will not benefit anybody. Justice and equity deserve more careful and less partisan application. I will never tire of repeating the old latin adage. We are servants of the law so that we may be free.

“Police on the scene, you know what I mean, they passed me up, confronted all the dope fiends”- Robert Matthew (a.k.a Vanilla Ice, criminal record includes possession of firearms, domestic violence, expired pet tags, driving with expired licence)

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

God Help Us

There should only have been one verdict in today’s court case before Magistrate Farrugia and thankfully for those who have some residual faith in the system that outcome was confirmed. The Police Commissioner’s last ditch attempt to retain possession of Norman Vella’s tablet and phone was thrown out on the most basic of bases: lack of reasonable suspicion.

As we already saw in an earlier post (Persons of Interest) the whole farce that led up to Norman Vella’s detention was a transparent combination of abuse of power and prima donna reactions (yet again) from those among the Taghna Lkoll crowd who still cannot come to terms with the borderlines and ethics of being in government. As much respect as I have for Comodini Cachia and the rest of the Nationalist lawyers having a field day as though the ghost of 1984 was back, I must insist that much of this case depended on the litmus test of whether our courts still retained a modicum of sanity.

Thankfully they do. Magistrate Farrugia could not but see the obvious bumbling of a police force (or members thereof) eager to over-respond to a complaint by people “connected” in the corridors of power (Jesus Wept). As the drama unravelled we could see the tenuous allegations of crime become at worst jokes in a panto. “There was a photo” became “actually not really a photo at the airport and we are still combing cameras”. The best was the Commissioner’s excuse that he needed to keep the confiscated goods otherwise if he released them there would still be a shadow of doubt on Vella. See? The police confiscated the material TO PROVE HIM INNOCENT.

Not even the heady days of “moralment konvint” beat this. If I recall well Manwel Mallia recently mentioned an upgrading of the police academy to some sort of college where the police would learn the finer art of the law and how to apply it. That seems to be one hell of an uphill task given how the police manage to make a basic application of the most basic laws by a defence lawyer sound like the greatest twist in a John Grisham movie.

In normal democracies heads would roll. In the UK the head of the (insert region here) Constabulary would be constantly grilled on the media while an Independent Police Enquiry would be set up to see why so many police resources and hours were wasted simply because a couple of communications coordinators with delusions of grandeur called in to report their distaste at being photographed.

That’s a normal democracy. But this is not a normal democracy. In this democracy of ours the police are told that they were “doing their duty”, some people will point to the arrogant Norman Vella and say that he had no business (doing what exactly? no business not taking photos?). For heaven’s sake some self-appointed investigators will point to this mess and blame AD voters for the reason things have come to this, quickly forgetting that much of the blame lies at the feet of an unelectable incumbent last time round.

Whoever is to blame is not the point. The point is that our custodians have been hung up to dry and shown to be unable to think for their own and apply the law as the guardians that they should be. It should not have taken a Magistrate to confirm that there were no grounds for a crime.

Their motto is Domine Dirige Nos… God guides us. I guess God must be taking a break. Let’s hope he’s there to help us next time they go on some sort of renegade mission.

Categories
Articles

J'accuse : You can't always get what you want

This is the J’accuse column from yesterday’s The Malta Independent on Sunday (July 31st).

I cannot stand conspiracy theories. Worse still, I cannot stand most conspiracy theorists for their willingness to accept half-truths and bent facts much more readily than keeping their feet firmly on the ground. The stubborn manner with which a conspiracy theorist will bark out his “facts” and non sequiturs, without pausing to allow some much needed oxygen to reach his brain cells, is extremely frustrating. For someone who cannot stand conspiracy theories, the behaviour of Malta’s press world (commentators included) over the past week has been crazy to say the least.

A series of curious incidents that would each merit a separate chapter in the burgeoning annals of Maltese political and social eccentricity were pounced upon by a media circus that was all too eager to fill columns and pixels with whatever qualifies as a “scoop” or “exclusive” this day. The colourful summer recipe included some amateur spinning, some hastily assembled assumptions, a dash of insinuations and (in most of these cases) plenty of blind hope in partisan savoir-faire.

Cyrus the grate

If you set aside the Norway massacres, the latest life-vest thrown to the euro and the stories about the US’s battle to avoid economic hell (or if you actually thought of those before), then you would probably be thinking of the manner in which Cyrus is getting his name slapped across the headlines. He seems to manage to do so with grating irregularity and has long surpassed the star factor that his fellow councilman Nikki Dimech had achieved with his little bit of shenanigans some time back.

The latest instalment in the record-running show “PLPN’s Got Talent (kemm ahna sbieh min jaf jarana) is a series of events that − if you believe the conspiracy theorists − was triggered off by Cyrus’ Great Switch. Incidentally, here is one for the Black Belt Conspiracy Theorists − did you know that the name Cyrus has been linked to the Indo-European meaning “humiliator of the enemy”? Now that’s some food for thought. A kiwi, almost.

I cannot bore you with all the sordid details of the step by step accounts of what happened, who phoned whom and who called for who’s resignation. I’ll let you be bored elsewhere because frankly, if you have not picked up the various truths and colourings-in, then you might as well go on living the life of the blissfully ignorant. For those of you who love to perform the weekly hara-kiri of senseless speculation I have a few questions prepared.

A series of interesting questions

The PN first. Do you ever intend to start vetting candidates in such a manner as to avoid indecent surprises once they are elected to Parliament? Do you have any mechanism that somehow tests candidate suitability on the basis of the supposed basic set of values your party used to proudly carry? Do you still think that backing JPO to the hilt in the run up to the elections was a brilliant scheme?

And now Labour. The vetting question holds true for you too. Is it really enough for someone to say “I don’t like PN anymore” for them to suddenly waltz in and become a prized asset in your roadshow? Your “Dear Leader” called for the resignation of Edgar G C for having called the police commissioner. Are you telling me that a Labour PM would not be worried about having a politically motivated police force and that therefore no phone calls would be made asking for reassurance that none of it is happening?

Worse still, it is a fact that EGC called Commissioner Rizzo upon instigation and in the presence of Cyrus Engerer. The same Engerer is under investigation for criminal offences. The worst that could have happened, politically speaking, is that such accusations and process are now public knowledge − but that does not change the nature of the offence for which he is ultimately accused. It does not in any way absolve Cyrus from the necessity to go through the due process. My question is − given the stinking web of networks and interests that seem to be weaved into the case − wouldn’t a temporary suspension from the Labour Party be the least you could do to ensure that Engerer gets to defend himself without the burden/excuse of political manipulation?

Networks

I dealt with the role of networks in the whole story before it unfolded any further. For further elucidation do pop over at www.akkuza.com and check out the post entitled “I.M. Jack − the one about Cyrusgate”. The way I see it we have a perfectly normal course of events in Maltese politics and social life that is suddenly being given a specific twist because of the convenience it has for certain parts of the partisan charade (and possibly for Cyrus himself).

Maltese social life is based on the building of networks. As I said in the blog: our PLPN society is built on webs and connections and networks. You publicly move up the ladder and before you know it you are a wheel in the power machine: sometimes you end up using that wheel’s power in complicated rituals that involve the exchanging of favours. Within that power system lies an unwritten rule that family and close friends might be given added consideration: it’s private you know. Think of the last time you saw someone getting his friend through on the VIP list in some nightclub and then think wider, bigger.

Look around you. Whether you are at the bank or at the grocer or at the public registry or negotiating a discount on your fine with a warden, there is one thing in common. You look at them beyond the normal confines of basic social interaction. You try to get to the banker who knows you or is a cousin twice removed, you prefer the grocer who treats you as a friend or the tax assessor who is married to your office mate’s brother and hopefully you are lucky enough to be dealing with a reasonable warden. These connections are crucial (as Google+ and Facebook have long found out) because the main currency on which these circles operate is the trading of power units.

Buying power

The policeman who meets a politician in the street and guarantees that a hush-hush case will probably be heard behind closed doors is attempting to wield the power he has in his sphere of influence. You find this kind of power all over the place − take civil services everywhere for example. Sometimes it is impressive what will open a door or close another. In Luxembourg, where the civil service employs mainly Luxembourgers, I learnt a crucial lesson that oils the wheels in your favour. It was simple really. Do not address the public servants in French. Short of Luxembourgish try English. Often it makes the difference between being ignored or misdirected and getting what you want immediately without as much as a huff.

What I believe lies behind the grossly inflated Cyrusgate is the wielding of multiple bits of power with the mistaken intention of upsetting or strengthening partisan loyalties. When suspicion falls on the police force about expediting or delaying the application of justice, what we are really saying is that there is a PC somewhere who holds the key to the speed of treatment of a dossier with Cyrus’ name on it. The mere fact that he can choose to speed it up is his little corner of power. Did this constable use it to ingratiate himself with one of the two parties? I doubt it. Can it happen? Possibly. And it can happen in favour of any of the two hubs of the main networks: the PL or the PN. And that is what worries me in the end.

Think also of the intricate network of lawyering that has been mentioned. Between Cyrus’ lawyer and Marvic’s lawyer we have a confusing cross-section of party and government loyalties. It’s clumsy but it’s done. That is the problem. I have long stopped blaming the policeman or the lawyer. I blame the system encouraged by voters (you know that don’t you?). Even though it should not make sense we accept lawyers shifting between their lawyer’s cap and their political cap as though it is the most obvious thing in the world. It’s not OK. It’s far from being OK but it’s how we do it in this country − whoever is in government.

Getting what you want

There’s no knowing how Cyrusgate will end. Papers like MaltaToday will go on milking the conspiracy theory dry while caught in a web of inherent contradictions. What jars most is not the need for the press to fill their papers with gossip that sells like pastizzi, but the readiness of the observers to swallow the filth without as much as a simple question that should bring the illogical conspiracy theory crumbling down. What will remain is a series of networks that are nurtured to feed the illogical partisan politics that is becoming less and less representative of value-driven politics every day.

The question on everyone’s lips once the police were suspected to be involved in Cyrusgate was “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Well maybe not in Latin but the gist was there. The phrase means “who will guard us from our guardians”? The biggest worry I have goes beyond that issue. In fact, I am convinced that our guardians only operate along the social mores that we have all become accustomed to and accept. They are the same social guidelines and standards that we continue to endorse every election year. Seen in that light, the question everyone is asking should be rephrased into one that is more simple and accurate: “Who will protect us from ourselves?”

www.akkuza.com is still dispensing highhanded advice from grey and rainy Luxembourg. We’re in Malta for August though – just enough time to remember why we still bother aye?

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Mediawatch Politics

The Horse's Mouth

One of the basic tenets of journalism that probably everybody and his brother has heard about is the principle of the 5 “W”s. It’s a concept that underpins the writing of a complete investigative answer by asking the questions “Who? What? Where? Why? and When?” and trying to provide an answer to all of them or an at least an indication as to why those answers were not immediately available. The additional question “How?” has occasionally been pinned onto the back of the original 5 Ws. In my last but one post “Don Paolo and the Recalcitrant Consiglieri” I started to track the “Nikki Dimech Gate” story and the reporting being made by MaltaToday on the subject. I tried to point out that the information being made available by the eager sleuths at MT is flimsy and lends itself more to unqualified speculation rather than presentation of hard and fast facts.

Now I am sure that MT’s sleuths have launched into the investigation with the best intentions of remaining the much needed breath of fresh air in investigative journalism that goes beyond the pure partisan aspects which we have gotten used to over the ages. I do not need convincing over this as much as I do not need convincing that MT has a mixed agenda of its own (known in polite circles as “editorial policy”) that merges market necessity (the need to quench public thirst for conspiracy theory style news/scandal – defined as any bit of news that provokes the reaction “X’gharukaza”) and a hazy political position that cannot be as easily and wittily summarised.

There is however something that Professors DeGaetano and De Marco would call a continuous crime of ommission occuring within this particular spate of reporting on DimechGate. While we should thank our lucky stars that there is a team of journalists who are interested in asking questions beyond the party spin and press release this does not mean that we – especially the newcomers to the Fourth Estate  such as bloggers – should not question certain vacuums in the line of thought. In the previous post we wondered why so much was being made on the supposed threat uttered by bungling PN SecGen PBO involving Dimech and a 72 year old councillors’ mother. Rationally reasoning out that threat brings out not two but three possible meanings:

1) We will eliminate your nonogenarian mother should you not comply with party policy (the mafia interpretation)

2) get off the bloody phone and talk with your mum later – we’re talking Dimechgate now (the impatient PBO interpretation)

3) we helped you rmum in so many ways and forget about that help if you persist in ignoring our position (the sleazy retraction of favours interpretation)

You will immediately notice that barring interpretation number 2 which is the milder of the three, the other two interpretations (Mafia and Retraction of Favours) qualify as forcible coercion to sign an impeachment motion. Now that is not something to be taken lightly. For PBO it could mean heaps of trouble – and I do not mean the contradiction in policy that was highlighted by the swift ostracisation of Nikki Dimech while still harbouring a 40 year old man being tried for sex crimes. Coercing a local councillor into signing a motion against his or her will is not just not kosher in today’s day and age but it could also have criminal consequences. Contrary to what public opinion may be on the subject, PLPN whips and Secretary generals are not the equivalent of their communist counterparts. They may give the impression that they can control everything under the sun (and some hidden hands like to think that they do just that) but the reality of the matter is that if we expect to be living in a liberal democracy in the 21st century then its local councillors should be free thinking human beings who can – if they so believe – go against the party line on a matter of principle.

So hurrah to MT for uncovering this particular phase. What happened next though continued to force me to question MT’s policies.  When councillor Camilleri was summoned to the police station for questioning, the knee jerk reaction on MT was to slap a title to the article that went on the lines of “PBO’s threat comes true as 72 year old councillor summoned for questioning by police”. I cannot link or quote verbatim because thankfully, it seems, there has been a rethink and the original title has changed. And there is an obvious reason for this. The reason is that no matter how much you may wish to toe the line that PBO has a hidden hand in police circles and that this DimechGate has been orchestrated from the start as some sort of elaborate frame up to rid Sliema of Dimech there is one fatal flaw in standing by this argument this time: PBO has absolutely no interest in having the police go  over his discussion with the Sliema councillor.

Somebody at the MT team must have noticed that because what I think is the new title to the article that appeared online yesteday is ”
Paul Borg Olivier worried as Sandra Camilleri gets called in by Police, after his threatening meeting with PN councilor”. (Yes, MT stick to their US English dictionary). Now that’s more like it. Which really means that the police have been acting very kosher all along. I have no particular interest in defending or attacking the police corps but hey you cannot blame them for investigating DimechGate from the start if there was a report of corruption by government officials and PN administration. You cannot blame the police either, for launching a possible investigation into the coercion of a public person involved in the administration of a local council. That fettering of discretion is an administrative crime and cannot be allowed to happen.MT has corrected its earlier eagerness to run along with the whole La Piovra & Don Paolo theory involving god knows what hidden hands in the process.

We are back to more rational lines where a number of questions are being asked rightly of our political system. This “mani pulite” phase in the short history of local council politics might involve the relative lightweights of PLPN politicking but it could turn out to be a valuable eye-opener as to the many no-nos committed in the name of partisan hegemony. Let us not forget that Nikki Dimech is being crucified for an alleged request for commission that would amount to a maximum of €240 (10 to 20% of €1200) and that Elizabeth Vella had to resign after receiving €80 that were not registered in the council’s accounts. By no means should such actions go unnoticed and unpunished (if you want to use that word) but this is still the same country where there is no rule on party financing and transparency and where the interests of contractors, investors and developers are curiously intertwined with the creme de la creme of our political high society (the heavyweights) right?

Enhanced by Zemanta