Two 'beaten up' by Paceville bouncers

Two brothers were beaten up by Havana nightclub bouncers on Wednesday night in what they described as a "brutal, vicious and out-of-control" attack.

The elder sibling, 24, was on the opposite side of the road when he saw his 21-year-old brother being smacked on the head, and ran across to intervene and protect him. But the bouncers were quick to lash out at him too and he was floored, he said.

In seconds, he was on the receiving end of a swipe, was knocked to the ground and kicked in the face by at least four bouncers, he said.

"It was clear that I had no intention of instigating a fight, but only wanted to protect my brother," so any excuses that bouncers are often provoked into defending themselves were out of line.

"I only asked them to get off my brother," he said.

"Such incidents have happened before and we have seen other guys share the same fate.

"The bouncers behaved like thugs and seemed to be getting a kick out of bashing" said the boys, who ended up with a mangled black eye, cuts and bruises, swollen noses and cheek bones, as well as ripped clothing, while the towering bouncers returned unscathed to business as usual outside the entrance to Havana.

"They were three times our size and all of them seemed to be out for a piece of the fun," the brother recalled. "They clearly all wanted to get involved and, like gangsters, worked as a pack."

The boys went to the polyclinic for treatment where they were informed by the doctor that "just one hour before, another guy had gone through a similar experience under the hands of the Havana bouncers".

The brothers filed a report with the police, following the acquisition of a doctor's certificate from the polyclinic, and were accompanied by police to Havana, where the bouncers were questioned.

They intend to take legal action and hope it does not result in a mere slap on the wrist.

"I believe that no matter what, using violence should really be the last resort. In this case, it was the first. But these bouncers seem to have a licence to fight and get away with it.

"If they picked on my brother like that, what are they like with people who provoke them?"

When contacted, Havana owner Hugo Chetcuti was not fully aware of the facts because, he said, he had just landed in Malta, but intended to get to the bottom of the incident and insisted that, whatever the situation, he did not agree with beating "on any grounds".

If it were the case, he would be the first to take action and, if necessary, fire those responsible, he said.

"I promise that if I find that the bouncers did something wrong, I will take immediate action myself. It is not the first time I have fired, or suspended security."

Where possible, patrons should only be pinned down until the police arrive on the scene, he said.

Without going into the merits of Wednesday night's case, Mr Chetcuti said such incidents were not only unacceptable from the moral point of view, but also had damaging repercussions on the business and had to be avoided at all costs. He would be consulting video tapes to establish the facts, he said.

Having said that, there were, doubtless, situations where patrons have been totally out of control, he said, with more people fighting than bouncers, which would require more aggressive action to calm things down.

Bouncers were often strongly verbally abused and badly provoked, but always got the blame with the police. It must be understood that people under the influence of alcohol, "even nice guys", can get aggressive and out of control, he said.

"It is not the first time patrons fight inside among each other and, when escorted out to put a stop to the brawl, end up fighting with the bouncers. As a rule, we take out the more aggressive party, irrespective of whether they are innocent, or not, to prevent the continuation of a fight outside. It is not for us to judge who is to blame, but merely to break up a fight, which could result in the injured and angered party being forced to exit the club."

Speaking about violence in nightlife areas in general, Mr Chetcuti believed that fines for using glasses and bottles in fights, as was often the case, should be increased substantially. A Lm20 fine was not a deterrent in his opinion, and the more severe the punishment, the less likely the crime.

Commenting on the Paceville situation, Philip Fenech, Hospitality and Leisure Division president of the Chamber for Small and Medium Enterprises (GRTU), said that in crowds, it was imperative to be seen to be taking action and immediately. This was not always easy when a nightclub was packed.

However, he continued, manhandling should always be the last resort, despite the fact that clients could sometimes be unruly as intoxication affected people in different ways.

"There are never any excuses to beat someone up, even though bouncers do get a lot of abuse and have to show that they are managing the door and in control."

Often, when escorted out, patrons continue provoking and swearing at the bouncers, even throwing empty bottles and glasses. Whatever the case, any action should be carried out with the least amount of physical force, he insisted.

"Security's priority, if abused, is to ignore and throw water on the flames; not to increase tension. It is also in the establishment's commercial interest to keep good order and not to disrupt the happy ambience.

"A bouncer's job is not to use violence if only to shield the establishment, or the clients and sometimes, even themselves, and our members are aware of this," Mr Fenech said.

It has to be noted that in these instances, police arraign both parties - bouncers and patrons - which means it is also in the security's interest to ensure that things run smoothly.

As regards the situation in Paceville, Mr Fenech said that thanks to a new by-law, issued last week by the St Julians local council, prohibiting illegal loitering with bottles or glasses, the situation was being controlled, slowly but surely.

Establishments are displaying signs that bottles and glasses cannot be removed, and barmen, waiters and bouncers are warning patrons. The word is spreading, creating more discipline on the streets, Mr Fenech said.

But more importantly, the positive response should serve to avoid serious incidents of violence - even murder as has been the case in the past.

According to the regulations, if establishments do not have a sign, they are liable on conviction to a fine of Lm20 and Lm5 for every day during which the provisions of the by-law are breached.

Mr Fenech has asked the authorities not to fine people for the first two weeks, the teething period, but to bring to their attention the regulations until everyone learns about them.

Stories of beatings by bouncers, often unprovoked, have been reported in the media for several years now. Many have involved the violent attack of foreigners and an element of racism has often been linked to the incidents. Onlookers have witnessed brawls that were sparked off simply because bouncers decided to react brutally to what was just a normal incident.

In 2001, following similar incidents, Mr Fenech had said it was high time a security system in establishments, modelled on that of the UK, was introduced.

Under the system, bouncers had to be registered before being employed and their responsibilities specified. It would also have ensured that they underwent a crash course on minding the door, while instructing them to use physical pressure in extreme cases only.

Mr Fenech was still working on the UK model, where a security authority was in place.

He has spoken to the authorities and hoped to see regulations being introduced by the Product Development Division of the Malta Tourism Authority, which aimed at achieving higher standards in the industry.

However, he continued, the level of education has improved over the years, resulting in more awareness and less incidents.

"I believe that the way to achieve more control on security personnel is by giving them their rights, but clearly defining their obligations."