The Nationalist mayor of Naxxar, Anne Marie Muscat Fenech Adami, is due to face disciplinary proceedings before a party board this month.
She was faced with quite a dilemma when she came to taking a stand on the massive development earmarked for the former Trade Fair Grounds car park. If she voted for, it would be in line with the sentiment expressed by her council but would be going against the instructions the party said it had given her: to oppose the project.
She decided that, in the circumstances, her role as mayor, promoting the interests of her locality’s interests superseded that of a political party representative, so she voted in favour when the Planning Authority considered the project in early December.
“I have sought the interests of the locality and our residents,” she said by way of explanation, insisting that her vote was a “full reflection” of the sentiment and decision of the local council.
It eventually emerged the PN had given “clear guidance” to the mayor so the council would vote against the project. The council is made up of five Nationalist and four Labour members. It is not clear whether such ‘instructions’ were only given to the mayor and not to all Nationalist members, none of whom appeared to be taking a stand against the project when it was last formally discussed at a council meeting.
The party was quick to react, asking the mayor to resign because of an “undeclared conflict of interest” on grounds that she is company secretary in a firm partly owned by the project’s architect. The mayor insisted the company in question has no projects in Malta and that she had been chosen as secretary by a consortium shareholder who has nothing to do with the Naxxar project.
Cryptically, the mayor insisted that her strong mandate by Naxxar residents “should not be undermined by any political game, especially when it is not based on facts”. She did not elaborate.
She was given 24 hours to step down or else the case would go before the discipline and ethics commission, the party evidently wanting to appear resolute in not wasting time and to strike while the iron was hot.
But when, a few days later, Times of Malta asked what was happening, it resulted that a formal investigation would only start this month.
The PR exercise done – that is, the party giving the impression it was taking immediate action in ensuring the “highest standards” from its officials and representatives – there seemed to be no more hurry.
The reason given was far from convincing: a meeting to hear evidence had to be postponed “to the earliest possible date in January” because a key witness was indisposed. The commission could still have started its work, especially if it was just one witness that was not available.
When Times of Malta pointed out that this was a relatively straightforward case, a spokesperson replied that the commission treats each case with the utmost seriousness and does not commence investigations with “preconceived ideas”.
“All cases are carefully investigated to ensure a fair hearing. Therefore, it would not be right or fair to decide beforehand when a case will be finally decided,” the spokesperson said.
But that is exactly what the PN had done when it publicly demanded the mayor’s resignation – not suspension – within 24 hours.
In parliament, people’s representatives are expected to vote on party lines. At local government level, the political parties should allow councils to put residents’ interests first. As things stand, it is not only the Naxxar mayor that is in a quandary.