Twenty years ago, then-police commissioner George Grech had to resign in the wake of a sex scandal. The Minister for Home Affairs at the time was the same person who is now probably advising the Nationalist Party to boycott the parliamentary grilling of the new commissioner-in-waiting, Angelo Gafà’. 

The grilling is part of a new historic mechanism of appointment which includes a public call for applications and shortlisting by the Public Service Commission. This contrasts sharply with the absolute ministerial discretion of previous Nationalist administrations up to 2013. 

In fact, despite commissioner George Grech’s resignation in 2001, neither then Home Affairs Minister Tonio Borg nor any of his Nationalist successors ever relinquished the slightest bit of unfettered discretion in appointing police chiefs.  Thus, whilst the Opposition's calls are justifiably based on the catastrophic rule of law situation former prime minister Joseph Muscat has unfortunately dragged this country into, they must be vigilant not to give the impression of splitting hairs or putting spokes in the wheels of a good step in the right direction which successive Nationalist governments failed to even remotely consider, let alone implement. 

Indeed if the Nationalist Party one day decides to indulge in some well overdue genuine soul searching, even if it is superficial, it will immediately discover that its current situation is at least partially due to the lethargy and lack of implementation of basic reforms during the Tonio Borg/Carm Mifsud Bonnici tenure of the Justice and Home Affairs portfolios, which were only split in 2011 after my assiduous campaigns in Parliament - one if the most significant constitutional developments in recent years. That inaction led to injustices, people being unfairly condemned for others’ faults and a big gaping hole in the party’s creed, besides obviously creating a fertile ground for Muscat’s subsequent excesses! 

As a criminal lawyer, I have been facing police officials in court daily for the past twenty years. I must confess that while carrying out my professional duties with passion and diligence, my respect for the police uniform has grown over the years. I have encountered many dedicated and serious officials, and in 2011 when I formulated the holistic justice and constitutional reform- www.riformagustizzja.com - whilst I proposed various reforms to the police corps, including the setting up of a police union, the strengthening of forensic facilities and the splitting of the investigative and prosecution sections, I did not propose any change to the method of appointment of the police commissioner. This was for two reasons.

First, the incumbent at the time was a well-respected officer of integrity and posed no problems. Secondly, I still believe the appointment should be, as much as possible, a government prerogative within checks and balances. The new procedure goes a long way in ensuring transparency and anything more would only serve to disfigure the role of Prime Minister, rather than add anything to that of police commissioner.

In fact, the Opposition's proposal to have a commissioner appointed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament is not only impractical. It is also dangerous. A prime minister who does not enjoy moral authority or legal power to appoint a police commissioner should not even hold the position of prime minister in the first place.  

Parliament building in Valletta. MPs must question and then vote on the police commissioner nominee before he can assume office. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier

After all, what kind of prime minister is he who has no power to appoint the commissioner of police! Wrong prime ministerial choices are punished by the electorate at the polls, not by disfiguring the prime ministerial system of government by counterproductive reforms. 

The new procedure, which is an enormous improvement and goes a long way in ensuring transparency and meritocracy, merits support.  Notwithstanding this and despite the person being proposed is renowned for his integrity, investigative capabilities and wide respect within the corps, the Nationalist Opposition has declared that they will boycott the grilling -  a mechanism which even I had suggested should be included when the new procedure was being discussed a few months ago.  

This is not only intrinsically wrong but also damaging as a strategy. The Opposition risks giving the impression that either some within the party are not comfortable with the nominee's reputation for fearless and impartial investigation, or that they have no questions to ask at the grilling and thus have pulled out. 

The Opposition should also avoid giving the impression that by objecting to Gafà’s appointment now, they would be able to cry foul if any investigations not to their liking take place in the future, a strategy that might work with someone who might be compromised, but probably not in this case.

What is even more baffling is that the Opposition will probably gain nothing by undermining the credibility and stature of an eventual police commissioner who comes with an untarnished reputation and whose integrity and qualifications have not been questioned by anyone. Obviously eventually performance matters and he will be judged accordingly. Even more so when the basis of contention is an aspect of the new appointment procedure, which one must again remind, is an enormous improvement on the PN's 25-year absolute and unfettered ministerial discretion in appointment powers. 

Otherwise, the party might expose itself to some grilling. Why wasn’t the police commissioner appointment method changed even when, under Tonio Borg's watch, then-commissioner Grech had to resign? And now that a new, more transparent and meritocratic procedure has been put in place and an officer of unquestioned integrity and qualifications has been nominated, why this stamping of feet and throwing tantrums?

The Opposition has a golden opportunity to see its two-thirds proposal implemented in practice by supporting the nomination, thus having a commissioner appointed through both government and Opposition proposals! If the Opposition really believes in its two-thirds majority proposal, they should vote in favour of Gafà’.

At the very least, the Opposition should attend the grilling and ask the hard questions they believe should be asked, and then vote accordingly. By boycotting the grilling, they are not even giving themselves a chance to ask questions. And that is basically abdicating their responsibility.

Franco Debono.

Malta is a small country with a small and restricted number of people eligible for such a sensitive post. Parties will have their preferences, but once the nominee is one of those eligible and qualified, even if not the other party's favourite candidate, a mature consensus should be reached. A hard stance would only show how dangerous a mandatory two-thirds requirement would be in the hands of a stubborn Opposition! 

Let us not sacrifice talent and good qualities on the altar of political bickering. This country, like every democracy, deserves a credible and strong Opposition, and this is a golden opportunity to turn a new leaf.

Franco Debono is a criminal lawyer and former Nationalist MP.