A lot has been said about the new procedure for the appointment of police commissioner. However, one thing is undeniable, that is, the new procedure is a big step in the right direction.
On more than one occasion, the prime minister has made it clear that the government will be taking on board the recommendations made by the Venice Commission and this has translated into reality.
The Public Service Commission will be the first and main tier, so to speak, for the appointment of the police commissioner.
The extent of who may apply for the post of commissioner has been drastically widened since the PSC will issue a public call even for people who do not form part of the police force.
We are changing the system from one where the prime minister had absolute discretion to choose his preferred candidate to one where the PSC will limit the choice to the best two candidates following a public call.
One must point out that the members of the Public Service Commission are appointed as provided for by the Constitution, which imposes strict and rigorous rules for the appointment. This is namely that a candidate for the House of Representatives or a candidate for a local council election cannot be appointed to a post on the PSC. Thus one can safely conclude that the members of the PSC are chosen from the parties concerned on the highest level of diligence.
We are moving away from an exclusive decision by politicians
Following the proposed procedure, the PSC will inform Cabinet of the two most suitable candidates they recommend to be appointed as police commissioner.
This proposal was endorsed by respected legal minds in the country; however, some others have criticised it.
Some of those who have come out against the proposal argued that the prime minister will be appointing the wrong person for the post. How can one assume this will be the case? From what was proposed by the prime minister, the veto to block the PSC selection (as suggested by the Venice Commission) will be forfeited.
Lastly, the selected candidate will also have to undergo a grilling before the parliament’s Public Appointments Committee – a committee composed of members coming from both sides of the aisle.
The recommendation made by the Opposition, that the position of police commissioner should be chosen by a two-thirds majority, could lead to practical problems. Mainly, that if no agreement is reached, resulting in a political deadlock, then such a crucial post would remain vacant.
As other prominent lawyers have declared during the past few days, the two-thirds majority might look very good on paper but has rarely worked in Malta.
I must also remind readers that leading academics in the past have stated that the Opposition was shooting itself in the foot with such a proposal.
In one of its documents, the Opposition had proposed that in such circumstances there should be a simple majority vote, which in practical terms means that once again, the government would be choosing the commissioner.
Furthermore, the issue of transparency and accountability goes beyond a vote in parliament. I believe that the fact that there will be a public call and a parliamentary grilling is much more important than the political debate that the Opposition is suggesting take place on the appointment of such a sensitive post.
With the absolute powers of the prime minister being dismantled by the proposed system, we are moving away from an exclusive decision by politicians, and that is the spirit I would like to see in this change and others of the same kind which will be proposed in the future.
Ultimately, the crux of it all is the good will of the parties involved.
The newly proposed procedure will ensure that the person selected as police commissioner is indeed the right person for the job, free from political influence to perform his or her obligations in the best possible manner.
At this critical moment in time, the government has shown political maturity in relieving itself of some of its powers, for the sake of having a mature discussion.
This procedure is still in its very early stages and will still have to prove its worth; however, the government is demonstrating decisiveness, as it is aiming to change the manner in which positions within the most important institutions of a democratic country are appointed.
Dustin Camilleri is a lawyer.