From Charles to Byron: Labour’s changed accountability standards

On 28 January 1998, prime minister Alfred Sant rose up in parliament to make a ministerial statement. The subject was the resignation, earlier in the day, of justice minister Charles Mangion.

The minister had submitted his resignation over what he claimed was a misunderstanding of a Cabinet memo that dealt with presidential pardons involving drug crimes. Mangion had done nothing criminal or even unethical. His resignation was the result of political misjudgement.

The prime minister had immediately accepted Mangion’s resignation while praising him for setting a high bar for “public and political accountability”.

Mangion’s resignation was prompted by his decision to recommend a presidential pardon for a prisoner, who was serving time for possession of 30g of cocaine. The inmate’s lawyer had written to the minister requesting that his client be released from prison a month earlier than was due so that he would be able to enjoy Christmas with his family.

Mangion sought the advice of the police force, which was contrary to the one-month pardon.

The minister also sought the advice of the prison drug rehabilitation facility in Mtaħleb, known as SATU (Substance Abuse Therapeutic Unit), where the prisoner had been receiving treatment for drug addiction. SATU was not against the pardon since the man had registered progress but urged that upon release, he continue visiting the centre for assistance.

Based on this advice, Mangion decided to recommend the pardon, which saw the man being released from prison a month early.

Cabinet memo, Queiroz and accountability

In May 1997, the Cabinet had decided to delegate decision-making on petitions for clemency exclusively to the justice minister. However, requests for presidential pardons involving drug crimes had to be referred to Cabinet.

Mangion had interpreted ‘drug crimes’ to be a reference to the more serious cases of drug trafficking and not simple possession as was the case that cost him his job.

In his resignation letter, Mangion recognised his failure to consult Cabinet on the pardon and resigned forthwith.

In parliament, Alfred Sant explained the rationale behind his decision to accept Mangion’s resignation.

“In no way could I agree with the [minister’s] decision [recommending the pardon], more so because this could contradict the harsh and justifiable criticism as a party in Opposition we had levelled towards the Nationalist government when it pardoned the drug trafficker Queiroz,” Sant said.

Francesco de Assis Queiroz was a convicted Brazilian drug trafficker who was caught importing 3kg of cocaine in a false-bottomed suitcase. In 1994, Queiroz was granted a presidential pardon by the Nationalist administration and sent back to his home country after serving just three years of his 12-year prison sentence.

The Labour Party in Opposition at the time was highly critical of the decision with Alfred Sant claiming he was morally convinced money had exchanged hands.

Roll forward to 1998 and Sant’s reference to the Queiroz affair was pertinent in the circumstances. His government could not be seen as peddling back on its strong stance against drugs.
But Alfred Sant also highlighted the fact that the pardoned inmate was being investigated by the police in a separate case of money laundering. This fact was unknown to Mangion.

Nonetheless, Sant had glowing praise for Mangion’s actions. “He is not only showing a unique example of accountability that we require in this country’s public life, but is translating words into action and abiding fully by this principle.”

There were no ifs and buts in Sant’s decision to accept Mangion’s resignation. Neither was there any attempt by Mangion to hide behind legal machinations to defend his political misjudgement. The minister admitted his mistake and resigned.

The whole episode remains until today a model of how political accountability should be exercised by elected representatives and top public officials.

The Byron affair

And 27 years later, Alfred Sant still holds those same views about accountability. In his weekly opinion piece in The Malta Independent (27 October 2025), the former Labour leader did not mince his words on the responsibility Home Affairs Minister Byron Camilleri should have shouldered after drugs stored on an army base were stolen.

Camilleri did offer his resignation but this was outright rejected by Prime Minister Robert Abela.

“Home Affairs Minister Byron Camilleri did well to offer his resignation following the theft of cannabis from an army depot. Perhaps it would have been better had he resigned,” Sant wrote.

The mis en scene of having the minister’s resignation rejected was not lost on Sant either, who compared it to an incident from the 1990s when then prime minister Eddie Fenech Adami had offered his resignation after a court found him guilty of political discrimination.

Sant commented: “After all, at Labour we made much fun of Prime Minister Fenech Adami when having been censured by the courts, he resigned, confident that he would be called back and ‘obliged’ to withdraw his resignation. But that must have been a long time ago!”

Fenech Adami’s resignation was rejected by his Cabinet and the President at the time and he stayed on.

‘If they mess up… you’re equally involved’

But Sant also shared his wisdom on what political responsibility means. “A politician in charge is responsible both for what he does and for what those who in his name exercise public service roles of a decisional and managerial nature do. If they mess up, he/she is equally involved.”

While insisting that proportionality was required, Sant commented that since 2000 there has been an excessive increase in instances when almost any failure has been tolerated or ignored.

He warned: “The impact of such an approach is not evident in the short term but it then continues to grow, leading in the end to a significant relaxation of the seriousness, discipline and accountability that the public sector needs to maintain in order to carry out its duties properly.”

Byron Camilleri has tried to distance himself from the drug heist incident by saying that he was not involved in the arrangements to have the sealed container transferred to the army base.

In his explanation, the minister said he had been informed by the ministry’s permanent secretary a few weeks ago that the Court Services Agency had asked for a container being held at the Freeport with drugs in it be transferred to a property administered by the Home Affairs Ministry. The transfer was necessary, Camilleri said, because of impending industrial action at the Freeport.

Camilleri added that the permanent secretary informed him that she was going to speak to the Armed Forces of Malta commander, Brigadier Clinton O’Neil.

“From then on I was not updated on the outcome of the discussion and any conclusions that may have resulted,” the minister said.

The next thing he learnt was that 200kg of cannabis resin were stolen from the same container that was being held on AFM premises.

In his statement on the day that the theft was reported to the police, Camilleri tried to wash his hands from the decision as to where the container should be located. “I offered my resignation to the Prime Minister… even if I played no part in the decision, even more so in its implementation, I believe decency required me to do so,” Camilleri said.

At the same time, the minister instructed his permanent secretary to suspend the army commander pending the outcome of investigations and until “certain facts are established” as to whether all adequate precautions were taken once the army accepted to receive the container.

Camilleri later received the backing of his colleagues in government and told journalists after a Cabinet meeting he will stay on as minister.

Camilleri’s responsibility

Political accountability was jettisoned out of the window by the minister, the Prime Minister and the rest of Cabinet.

But the Robert Abela’s immediate decision to retain Camilleri jarred with the summary suspension handed down to the army commander as soon as the heist was discovered.

Camilleri’s involvement in the affair must be scrutinised. For starters, he should have questioned why a court exhibit was being placed in his responsibility, and even more so that of the army.

Neither in Camilleri’s statement, nor in the ministerial statement made by the Prime Minister in parliament was there any indication as to whether the decision to transfer the container to the Home Affairs Ministry was challenged from the outset.

Nonetheless, once the drugs became his responsibility, Camilleri had a duty to ensure he be kept abreast of developments, something he evidently failed to do.

This was no ordinary circumstance – it involved 200kg of cannabis resin that was a court exhibit; and the responsibility to store the drugs was being tasked to the AFM, something that falls outside its military responsibilities. These should have been reasons enough for the minister to take an active interest in the outcome of the matter.

But even if he decided to delegate the matter to his underlings – something that is normal and acceptable – he remained ultimately responsible for the decisions taken by the permanent secretary and the Brigadier. In Alfred Sant’s words: “If they mess up, he/she is equally involved.”

And it would seem somebody did mess up when deciding where the container should be placed within army property.

A field, wire fence and a public alley

Sources close to the army have confirmed with MaltaToday that the container was transported to the AFM’s Special Operations Unit (SOU) base in Ħal Safi. This army property is separated from the Ħal Safi military barracks proper by the airport perimeter road that leads into the village of Ħal Safi.  

A public alley, used by farmers to access their fields, runs along part of the perimeter of the SOU base. A wire fence separates the alley from a field inside the SOU property, where there is a pistol range.

The thieves appear to have cut through this fence to gain access to the container from where they hauled the cannabis resin packets to a car that was waiting in the alley.

Although the SOU base does have CCTV surveillance, it is unclear whether this covers all areas and whether the container’s door was in sight.

But several retired army officers have told MaltaToday that the decision to site the container at SOU was a mistake.

“The army has far more secure locations than an open field that is separated from a public alleyway by a simple fence,” one former senior officer said. “The drugs could have been kept in any of the AFM’s armouries, which are secure areas with restricted entry; or they could have been kept at Fort Mosta; or at Luqa barracks, which is far more secure than the SOU base.”

Another former officer asked whether the army carried out a risk analysis of the chosen site to determine its adequacy.

“I hope the retired judge who has been appointed to carry out the administrative inquiry addresses all political, security and operational decisions taken, including the reason why the Court Services Agency in the first place does not have the capacity to ensure court exhibits are kept in a secure location,” the officer said.

Carrying the can

Another retired senior officer said it made little sense that the army commander was immediately suspended but Camilleri stayed on. “The politician responsible for the decision to accept the drugs on his ministry’s watch has remained in office while an administrative inquiry is supposed to look into his actions and those of other officials in the ministry, apart from what happened at the AFM. This does not make sense.”

Camilleri has resisted calls for his resignation. His supporters have been arguing on social media that he is a principled man and should not be made to carry the can for others’ failures.

Alfred Sant would beg to differ. Political accountability does mean carrying the can for others, even if not all misdemeanours necessitate resignation.

However, Byron Camilleri and Robert Abela do not believe the theft of 200kg of cannabis resin from an army depot is serious enough a matter for the minister to shoulder political responsibility and resign – or at least suspend himself pending the inquiry.

From Charles to Byron, Labour’s standards have truly tanked.