Wednesday, 20th August 2008
PSC should rule on Galea discrimination
In politics and the media we all know that summer is the silly season.
The disquieting story about how someone in the Management and Personnel Office (MPO) wrote to my friend Victor Galea of Alternattiva Demokratika, telling him that according to Section 7 of the Public Service Management Code (PSMC) he must either resign from his post as AD Secretary General or terminate his employment as a teacher within the public service more than confirms that summer is really and truly the silly season.
This tragi-comedy continued with a statement from higher up within the OPM itself saying that this missive had been put on hold and that the PM himself had no knowledge of the matter.
The situation would have been hilarious and farcical had not the bread and butter of Victor’s family and the principle of freedom of association, itself a basic human right also enshrined in the Constitution of Malta, been at stake.
Let us get things straight, the Prime Minister has done well to intervene in order to stop what many are agreeing is nothing but a witch-hunt, a Gozitan vendetta against Mr Galea. And this is not to forget the two members of Alleanza Nazzjonali (AN) who also received a similar missive.
Beyond this, however, it is worth emphasizing that the Prime Ministerial order to stop the letter is not enough.
What are at stake are two principles. Firstly, the right of public service employees to exercise their basic human rights of freedom of thought, conscience and association.
Secondly, the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination in such matters.
As things stand, the MPO issued a letter to Victor Galea but not to Stephen Cachia, AD’s Deputy Chairperson, or me, both of us being also employed by the Education Ministry as Heads of School. What is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander and so if some over-zealous pen-pusher at the MPO saw fit to fire off a letter to Victor Galea he or she should have sent a similar letter to me.
The problem is that such over-zealous pen-pushers either do not read all of the PSMC or do not read it correctly.
Chapter 7 - Conduct – Section 7.2 (Political Activities) clearly states that it is only public officers in Grades 1 – 5, i.e. from Permanent Secretary down to the level of Assistant Director who are strictly forbidden from taking part in any political activity.
Until the last edition of the PSMC was issued in June this restriction applied only down to Grade 4, that of Director. Whoever decided that Assistant Directors should also be precluded from taking part in political activities still has to explain his reasons.
Such decisions are being taken without any form of discussion or consultation with anybody by the faceless and anonymous bureaucrats within the upper echelons of the civil service.
Now, to get back to the main issue, it must also be noted that Chapter 7, Section 7.2 , of the PSMC also allows those public officers not barred from taking part in any form of political activity to stand for Malta’s General Elections, European Parliament and Local Councils Elections.
This means that the spirit of the PSMC does not really go against allowing public officers from grades 20 to 6 to take part in political activities.
What stands in contradiction to all this is the following section.
“7.2.2.4. Restrictions for officers in Scales 1 to 13.
Officers in Scales 1 to 13 are debarred from:
(a) holding office in party political organisations impinging on the political field;
(b) speaking in public on matters of political controversy;
(c) expressing views on political matters in letters to the press, or in books, articles or leaflets; and
(d) canvassing on behalf of parliamentary candidates of a party.
Public officers below Scale 5, may however, apply for special unpaid leave to hold office in the central executive of a political party as stipulated in paragraph 4.7.2.1.”
To my mind this is where the problem lies. This sub-section goes against the general spirit of the slant in favour of allowing civil servants from Scale 6 downwards to be politically active.
A clear ruling on this issue and the rescinding of this outdated sub-section should be given sooner rather than later. However, it should not be done by the OPM. This matter is, in my view, so serious and fundamental that it should be carefully but expeditiously examined by the Public Service Commission (PSC), the Constitutional watchdog on fairness and non-discrimination in the civil service.
It is the PSC which should then give a final ruling on the Victor Galea case based on a 21st century updating of the PSMC.
PS. For those who have, rightly, asked in comments on this issue what is Labour’s reaction to it may I state that our leader, Joseph Muscat, took an immediate interest in the matter and contacted me about it last Sunday afternoon. I gave him my opinion as outlined in this blog but advised him to consult other persons who know the workings of the civil service more closely before making a public statement. That is how modern, professional political parties work.
RSS
Comments
VIVA LA LIBERTA`.
Nevertheless and notwithstanding, one has to keep in mind that this particular PSC regulation had been applied to many others in similar situations and not just in the political arena. It would have been applied to Mr. Grixti himself, had he been elected Gen. Sec. of the MLP. The problem here lies in the fact that Mr. Galea receives no remuneration for his generous endeavors in favour of our local political scene. His position in Alternattiva Demokratika is not remunerable. So, while technically it is correct to apply this regulation, also in Galea's case, on the practical level this regulation becomes extremely unfair, biased, classist and dangerous. Therefore, my view is that whoever it was at MPO who started all this is incompetent, irresponsible and definitely not fit to fill the position he is in.
Victor Galea is more honest then others and it is not a crime to have different political believes from others.
What amazes me is that the MPO NEVER wrote to the President of the PN in Gozo, who by profession is a teacher though was 'temporaliy transfered' to the Cultural Department in Gozo by the previous PN Adminstration.
Why an Administration behaves differently is most undemocratic. PN justice in action indeed.
The section quoted by Alfred " “7.2.2.4. Restrictions for officers in Scales 1 to 13." restricts all and does not give the PN any Devine Right! Why does the MPO behaves differently with the person occupying the Highest position in the PN structure in Gozo?
If being temporily transfered was a way out why Mr Galea is not given the same opportunity?
Yes Mr Galea is being discriminated for his political views. And Mr Galea should use what I wrote above to justify himself and a give a crystal proof that he is being discriminated.
Indeed "Fl-imkiem kollox possible"! What a shame!
Very well explained.
I hope and wish that now that the Office of the Prime Minister has put on hold an ultimatum given by the Management and Personnel Office to myself, to choose between his job as a teacher and involvement in politics something good will come out of it.
Like many others, I look forward to the immediate review of the obsolete regulations that are still in place today, despite the fact that Malta joined the EU over four years ago. And I wish that the MLP will keep reminding Gonzi about this in parliament.
I also wish you all the best in your teaching career.
Victor