The new standards commissioner reached his conclusion. Transport Minister Aaron Farrugia is careless, a bad planner and indecisive – but he didn’t breach the code of ethics. The newly appointed commissioner, former Labour Party candidate Joseph Azzopardi, confirmed what everybody else thinks about Farrugia.

In his mad rush to please Robert Abela, Azzopardi decided he shouldn’t investigate Farrugia. Farrugia was due to appear in parliament to answer questions. He didn’t turn up. The country had just seen a horrific video in which Transport Malta employees ruthlessly beat a motorist lying helpless on the ground.

Farrugia was the minister. He knew he’d face burning questions about the case. Farrugia was in parliament but decided not to enter the chamber, evading questions.

Those questions were our questions. When parliamentary representatives ask ministers questions, they pose them on our behalf. We have a right to answers. Ministers have a duty to answer expeditiously, truthfully and completely. That’s the basis of democracy ‒ transparency and accountability.

Farrugia’s contemptible willful absence from the chamber was a slap in the face of democracy. He not only failed to answer questions, he didn’t even have the courage to turn up. To rub salt into the wound, Farrugia was in parliament minutes earlier. Yet, he simply didn’t bother entering the chamber.

The ministerial code is absolutely clear. Ministers must attend parliament and answer questions. They’re only excused in specific situations ‒ if they’re abroad or if they’re ill. Farrugia was neither.

Parliamentary Standing Or­der 158 also excuses ministers if they are on government business and their absence has the speaker’s explicit approval. In Farrugia’s case, the speaker wasn’t even aware Farrugia would be absent.

Farrugia broke both the ministerial code and Parliamentary Standing Order 158. He showed contempt and disdain towards the public he is meant to serve. He was reported to the new standards commissioner.

The commissioner was given an easy case. Clear-cut. It should have been an elementary straightforward investigation. And an even more straightforward ruling.

But that’s assuming the commissioner is there to uphold the highest standards in public life. That’s not what Azzopardi was appointed for. The prime minister walked through fire to appoint Azzopardi as standards commissioner with the explicit task of covering up Labour MPs’ wrongdoing.

That is exactly what Azzopardi did. And what’s the best way of covering up for Farrugia? No investigation. Faced with incontrovertible evidence of Farrugia’s ethics breaches, Azzopardi decided not to investigate him at all.

The big advantage of not investigating is that everything gets buried. And the biggest advantage of all is that not even the commissioner’s letter replying to the complainant gets published. Everything is secret.

Standards Commissioner Joseph Azzopardi’s carte blanche incentivises Labour’s bad behaviour and contempt for the public- Kevin Cassar

The commissioner, who is meant to uphold the highest ethical standards of transparency, honesty and integrity, conspired with Labour to hide everything from the public.

The only reason we know anything about Farrugia’s case is because Repubblika published that docu­ment. If it weren’t for Repubblika nobody would have known. “This document will not be published by my office,” the commissioner triumphantly concluded.

Azzopardi is truly living up to the role Abela assigned him ‒ gravedigger-in-chief. His principal role is to bury Labour’s guilt.

Azzopardi’s letter to Repubblika is shocking. Azzopardi tied himself in knots trying to find excuses for Farrugia. He presented completely flawed reasons why he shouldn’t investigate.

First, he claimed his predecessor had concluded that ministers who fail to answer parliamentary questions shouldn’t be investigated. But Farrugia was reported not because he failed to answer questions but because he just didn’t turn up without the speaker’s approval.

Then, he referred to another George Hyzler decision not to investigate an MP who didn’t attend parliament but who had the speaker’s approval for his absence. That didn’t apply to Farrugia either.

Azzopardi found other excuses for not investigating.

In an e-mail to the speaker, Farrugia claimed he failed to attend “because of other commitments”.

“At 4.20pm I was due to take part in an important meeting,” he stated. What was that important meeting that was more important than answering the people’s questions in parliament? We don’t know. Neither does the commissioner.

It might have been a meeting for his canvassers ‒ that would surely be considered important by Farrugia. The least the commissioner could have done was enquire as to what sort of meeting it was. He didn’t bother, for one simple reason. He’s not interested in maintaining standards. His role is covering up for Labour.

Farrugia was all over the place. He desperately tried to justify how he could possibly have been in parliament but not walk into the chamber. “I managed to arrive at Valletta before the time of the meeting and for me it was natural to attend parliament, where I arrived soon after 4pm. Outside parliament …. I felt I had to stop and answer a journalist. I even stopped to speak to colleagues. Then I rea­lised time was pressing to attend to my commitment due at 4.20pm. It was precisely because of this that I failed to enter the chamber.

“I informed the whip that it was going to be difficult for me to arrive on time,” Farrugia claimed. But the whip didn’t inform the speaker. The speaker didn’t give his approval for Farrugia’s absence. But that didn’t matter for Azzopardi. Sweating profusely, he finally had his excuse to exculpate Farrugia.

Farrugia didn’t break any ethics, Azzopardi announced, because he informed the whip. So, no investigation required. And my office won’t publish this. Thankfully Repubblika did.

In his panic to exonerate Farrugia, Azzopardi destroyed Farrugia. This was “bad planning by the minister”, “he should have scheduled his commitments with more care”, “the indecision of the minister”. This wasn’t bad planning. It was sheer disrespect and disdain for the public. It is the arrogance of one who feels above scrutiny and accountability.

Abela has demolished one of the last remaining safeguards against his anti-democratic authoritarianism.

Azzopardi’s carte blanche incentivises Labour’s bad behaviour and contempt for the public. He is Labour’s newest apologist.

Kevin Cassar is a professor of surgery.