Editorial: Shady stewards in the capital

Valletta, a UNESCO World Heritage site, will be patrolled by shady stewards, chosen by design, according to information reaching Times of Malta.

The idea – part of the Valletta Management Plan – to ensure order in the capital night and day is commendable, even if it comes rather belatedly. However, its execution has already suffered a false start.

The national heritage ministry says the plan is aimed at enhancing maintenance, order, security and accessibility. An early initiative launched by the steering committee tasked with overseeing the plan is the setting up of the Valletta stewards and a cleansing team.

The cleansing team has been strengthened in numbers and money will be invested in new machinery. The state of cleanliness or otherwise should be easy to assess.

Still, the team’s efforts will be significantly neutralised – if not annihilated – unless there is effective enforcement of public hygiene/cleanliness regulations.

That is where the stewards are likely to come in, although their terms of reference were not immediately announced.

When the initiative was unveiled a few days ago, it was stated that the uniformed stewards will support the work of the police though they are meant to serve as a deterrent to vandalism and other possible illegalities in Valletta. Their main role, it seems, is one of surveillance.

Now it turns out that, among the new Valletta stewards ‘paraded’ for the official launch, were a former police sergeant major and a former sergeant who had both been suspended from the police force. They are suspected of having played a leading role in a massive police overtime racket unearthed in 2020 and, like other officers, they still face serious criminal charges in court.

Another, apparently, has a background of domestic violence allegations.

Now this is what emerged from an official photograph showing just four stewards.

One will start to wonder what sort of baggage the others, either already engaged or still to be recruited, carry.

It gets more worrying when one learns that it may well be part of a government scheme intended to find alternative employment to suspended police officers.

Of course, we all err and those who genuinely repent and pay for their mistakes deserve to be given another chance. However, though still presumed innocent, these individuals have a dark shadow hanging over them. So dark, in fact, that they had to be suspended from their police work.

They may not be armed, or be empowered to issue fines, arrest people or take direct enforcement measures. However, by engaging such individuals, the government risks conveying the wrong message, especially to serving police officers who are expected to be beyond reproach in the exercise of their duties and who should, rightly, face serious consequences if they default.

The question the powers that be ought to ask themselves at the end of the day is: Will visitors to Valletta feel comfortable walking up to such stewards if they feel their safety is somehow being threatened?

Or will the mere knowledge that among them may be characters whose conduct was deemed unbecoming a law enforcement agent lead to a good degree of apprehension? Let us bear in mind that personal safety in Valletta has often been questioned. Even the prime minister had admitted he did not deem it safe to allow his young daughter to walk alone in the capital.

So why not try to give the impression, at least, that we are serious about maintaining law and order?