Ombudsman slams prison administration over unfair dismissal of former guard

The Ombudsman has flagged the unjust dismissal of a former guard by the prison’s administration.

The complaint was lodged with the Office of the Ombudsman by Emanuel Cassar, who claimed that on 24 March 2019 he was fired in an abusive manner, following a “frame-up”.

Cassar said that an argument between himself and CCF Chief Operating Officer Randolph Spiteri – a former aide to PN environment minister George Pullicino – led to his sacking. Following the clash between the two, Spiteri felt the Correctional Agency’s disciplinary board should be convened in order to assess Cassar’s behaviour.

The argument concerned the use of uniforms, with Cassar telling Spiteri to “leave him alone” or else he would be “going where he needs to go”. In an email, Spiteri subsequently informed prison director Alex Dalli and requested the disciplinary board discuss the incident.

The decision was approved by Dalli, with the disciplinary board composed of three agency officials. After reviewing the case, the board found Emanuel Cassar guilty of his actions, and recommended that Dalli inform the Public Service Commission about Cassar’s ousting.

The PSC also summoned the two parties to hear their side of the story, and after meeting with them, decided to rubber-stamp the board’s decision.

This led to Cassar’s dismissal from public service on 25 March 2019. The decision also resulted in Emanuel Cassar losing out on his pension.

But in his conclusions that Cassar had been unfairly dismissed, the ombudsman took into consideration a number of factors, including the fact that the complainant had already received a warning on 14 November 2018, after he was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment suspended for four years, following a domestic dispute with his wife over their child.

The ombudsman noted the fact that Cassar formed part of the disciplinary corps, and so was subject to strict discipline. Despite the considerations, Emanuel Cassar’s removal was still considered unjust. “It goes against the basic principles of natural justice,” the ombudsman said.

It was also pointed out that having a disciplinary board composed of officials who respond directly to the person who started the proceedings, does not guarantee justice to the person under scrutiny. “How can an official who takes orders from the authority who started proceedings against another official be independent? This is a case which, even with the best intentions from the Chairman and the board members, made way for injustice,” the report read.

The ombudsman stressed that the disciplinary board could never have been “impartial or independent” when they report directly to the prison director. “What justice is there, when the process is one of ‘judge, jury and executioner’.”

The ombudsman said that while Cassar is ideally reintegrated into public service, the circumstances of the investigations suggest otherwise. He therefore recommended he is compensated for his pension on a pro-rata basis.

He also called on the Public Service Commission to review its disciplinary proceedings with regards to the firing of employees from their work place. Such a review should be carried out in line with European legislation.