Robert Abela breached four articles of the ministerial code of ethics. He used our money to pay for a sponsored post consisting entirely of a film about himself. “The film focuses continuously on you… and the way in which it is presented is clearly intended as a personal advert for yourself,” the standards commissioner chastised Abela.
Yet, the commissioner was surprisingly accommodating. He offered to close the case if Abela simply apologised and pledged not to repeat his
infringements. Abela refused. And went ballistic.
Abela denied the facts, lied repeatedly that he hadn’t been allowed to present evidence, played a game of brinkmanship with the commissioner, contested the guidelines, abused the complainant and attacked the commissioner.
That’s no surprise. Many now realise Abela is an arrogant, spoilt brat who thinks the rules don’t apply to him. He’s a nasty bully who thinks he’s always right. His idea of responsibility is escaping on his yacht while people struggle with pandemic restrictions.
What was more shocking was that Abela pinned the blame for his ethics breaches on his most loyal aides. Instead of owning up and taking responsibility, Abela threw his own staff under the bus.
Abela could have written a vague apology and the commissioner would have closed the case. Clyde Caruana did so. Even the conceited Silvio Schembri managed to write a half-hearted apology when found guilty of ethics breaches. Not Abela.
Instead, Abela incriminated his own staff.
He wrote: “Everything connected to the film falls under the responsibility of whoever is employed for that purpose and to whom I provided the guidelines on August 2, 2021, immediately as soon as they were published, with clear instructions to abide by them even though those guidelines are not mandatory and have no legal binding.”
For Abela’s aides, his words must cut deeply. They reveal one of Abela’s darkest traits – he won’t hesitate to drop you into the fire to spare himself the slightest scratch, even after you’ve served him loyally for years. You’re worth nothing to him. He’ll squeeze even his closest aides dry and discard them without thinking twice. Nothing matters to Abela except Robert Abela.
Even the commissioner was appalled. “The final responsibility falls on the prime minister,” the commissioner replied, “if his (Abela’s) instructions weren’t followed, he should take concrete and prompt action to remedy the wrong. In this case, there is no indication that was done.”
The prime minister and party leader should be setting the example, abiding by the rules, respecting the institutions.
But, instead of replying respectfully to the complaint, Abela vented his spleen on Arnold Cassola who was simply exerting his rights.
“The role of your office,” Abela wrote to the commissioner, “should never be used to paralyse government from publicising its work as is its duty in a democracy… I understand that the complainant effectively has this principal aim, which motivates him to lodge such an absurd complaint… a frivolous complaint.”
Abela then lied repeatedly.
The film in question, he claimed, “is primarily about projects of national importance… information about them is of public interest”, “the material is respectful, factual and not partisan”.
Many now realise Robert Abela is an arrogant, spoilt brat who thinks the rules don’t apply to him- Kevin Cassar
Not even Abela’s compliant commissioner could take this. In a brilliant demolition of Abela’s nonsense, the commissioner simply replied: “The film shows only you.”
Abela crossed the line, launching a frontal attack on the commissioner.
He mocked the commissioner, implying he didn’t even understand his role: “the commissioner’s role is not to legislate indirectly but to apply the law as it is, neither should he give new meaning to the existing rules with his guidelines.”
The commissioner was compelled to defend those guidelines. He wrote back to Abela, stating: “this office affirms the value of the guidelines.”
The commissioner found Abela guilty, concluding that the prime minister’s actions “represent unjustified spending of public funds, failure of separation of the role of prime minister and MP, and a lack of respect towards the impartiality of the public service”.
He added that “this conclusion doesn’t require reference to the guidelines because it is evident when considering the content of the film and that it was published as a sponsored post”.
Yet, the commissioner still handed Abela an olive branch. He tried to exonerate Abela. Bizarrely, he claimed that, since the cost involved was low and the film was short, he could close the case if Abela apologised.
Abela replied on the day of the deadline – December 11, 2023 – with a two-liner, accusing the commissioner of breaking the law by denying him a “fair hearing”. And no apology.
Sufficiently intimidated, the commissioner wrote back to Abela the next day. He pleaded with Abela that he’d given him plenty of opportunity to present his case and “in fact, that’s what you did through your letter dated June 14, 2023”. The commissioner even offered to reconsider the case afresh to let Abela present “any evidence or present new submissions”. Appeasement never works with bullies.
Again, Abela contemptuously kept the commissioner waiting until the very last day – January 5, 2024. He repeated his false claims that he hadn’t been allowed to present his evidence. He called the commissioner’s statements “erroneous”. He stamped his feet, falsely accusing the commissioner of finding him guilty before allowing him to present his evidence.
The commissioner wrote back. Again, he gave Abela another opportunity to present more evidence. Defiant as ever, Abela replied, even more insolent than before. “The cost of sponsoring the post was only €100,” he rebutted. He insisted that “the media considered it (the film showing him prancing around) of public interest”.
Abela lumped all the blame on his staff. “I told them to stick to the rules and they didn’t,” he argued.
By then, even the commissioner had had enough. The commissioner noted that, despite complaining that he had no opportunity to provide evidence, when given several opportunities to do so, Abela “produced no evidence”. “So, this office decided to conclude this investigation without further delay.”
Tellingly, Abela declared: “I don’t understand how my actions translate into a breach of ethics.” The man just cannot understand. Like Trump, he thinks he can do whatever he likes. “When you’re a star they let you do it, you can do anything,” Trump had boasted. And when things go wrong, like every other narcissistic autocrat, Abela will always find somebody else to blame.
Kevin Cassar is a professor of surgery.