The scent of money - is corruption in Malta really inevitable?

'Public Life In Malta - Essays on governance, politics and public affairs in the EU's smallest member state', Edited by Mario Thomas Vassallo, published by the University of Malta's Department of Public Policy.

Is corruption such an endemic part of Maltese life that encapsulates the way we do things? Cutting corners, relying on networks of friends-of-friends, and using the influence of big men (and women) to move ahead... is this an inevitable part of small-island life and the perks of being close to the centre of power and patrons?

Perhaps some of the answers to these questions remain unanswered, even in the collection of essays in 'Public Life In Malta' from the University of Malta's department of public policy, where experts in government administration and members of such illustrious watchdogs as the National Audit Office offered their insight into the structures the state has its disposal to fight corruption, bribery and the trading of influence.

But - alas - even the most encouraging of exhortations to increase accountability and transparency by public policy veterans like Godfrey Pirotta or Edward Warrington, comes on top of a grim background of years of political inadequacy at dealing with the patron-client relations that embody Maltese politics.

As NAO officer Keith Mercieca writes in his analysis on the factor that influence corruption (aptly titled 'The cat and the rat sleep together')... "this is a battle for the soul of our State" - a gripe about the at-times absent 'sense of community' when it comes to tax, the evasion of which today has accrued over into the hundreds of millions of euros.

To the assiduous readers of the Maltese press, where allegations of corruption and bribery from politicians (and less frequently, actual cases of confirmed corruption) are generally prominent affairs, heads rarely roll in Maltese public life.

Some recent events of public administration corruption reflect the short-lived ingeniousness of malfeasant civil servants: the bribery in the award of mariners' licences or the VAT department refund scams come to mind. Other allegations of trading in influence, amongst those by Alfred Sant against Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando in obtaining the permit for an open-air disco in Mistra; or claims by a contractor that construction developers Montebello were renovating the Finance Minister's house gratis in return for his brokerage influence into a hotel deal, are rarely followed up by the necessary legal or journalistic scrutiny they deserve.

Alfred Sant's anti-corruption drive in 1996 was a core message that ran throughout his entire political career and yet, as a MaltaToday survey established, less than 3% of its respondents see corruption as a major concern - falling way down in their priority list below bread-and-butter concerns like inflation, unemployment, fuel costs, and the general economy.

But the flipside to this is a nation that is generally aware and accepting of corruption. In 2009, the EU's Eurobarometer found that the Maltese, 73% compared to the EU average of 51%, thought bribes and abuse of power for personal gain were widespread in the issuing of building permits. The rating had gone up by 12 percentage points since a similar survey was held in November 2007.

Even more recently, the 2012 Eurobarometer confirmed that in Malta, corruption was simply an unavoidable fact of life: 88% saw corruption as a major problem in the country, although 52% said they were not affected by corruption in their daily life, a statement that might reflect the lack of awareness of the cost of corruption, which often happens in the greyest of areas of public and financial life.

The majority, 50%, believed the reason for corruption in Malta are the close links between business and politics. 40% also said this was down to MPs' inaction, 21% blamed the lack of transparency on public spending, 24% said that there is too much light sentencing, 21% said that it was down to public appointments not based on merit, 22% said corruption was part of daily life.

The problem of scale

Much of this reality - Malta's own version of the Italian 'arte di arrangiarsi' (the art of getting by, or doing it yourself by unofficial means) - has been aptly illustrated by the seminal work of Dutch anthropologist Jeremy Boissevain. In a city-state like Malta that also plays out the independent republic, size still plays an important part:

"Scale is a big problem here, where people usually will also have to rule over their families. How impartial can justice be here? Because it is a small society, conflicts of interest can arise at any time. And where the family has to stay and protect each other, this can therefore be a difficult situation," he told MaltaToday in 2006.

Boissevain has also delved extensively into the ethos of 'amoral familism' in Maltese society, where family-centric societies are ready to sacrifice the public good for the sake of nepotism and the immediate family.

NAO officer Keith Mercieca, whose dissertation dealt with corruption in Maltese society, concedes that while corruption is an ethical problem - borne out of people's need to achieve more, or cashing in on their roles or their proximity to the centre of power - the matter of smallness in Malta makes the functioning of a liberal democracy in its ideal sense, a tad troublesome.

He also points out the ambiguity of the distinction between public funds and private interests, aptly captured by the Maltese maxim 'u ijja, dawn m'huma ta' hadd' - "these are nobody's, it's OK to help myself, nobody gets hurt" - "Such perspectives are legacies shaped by Malta's colonial past," with reference to stealing from the Crown as it were less morally abject than stealing from your own. "While the older generations of Maltese are subject to the influence of our colonial past, the younger generation seems to constitute a stark shift in mindset," Mercieca claims, largely on his interviews with experts who claimed the young do not accept certain corrupt practices that might have been socially acceptable.

This may be in tune with the expectation of a new generation that demands rights to be equally weighed by obligation, and meritocracy to reward those who deserve the fruits of their labour. But it's not all clear-cut: Malta's strict driving tests had to go under a major reform when it turned out that a cartel of driving examiners were still accepting bribes from learners to pass them, just a few years ago.

But it's the diametrically-opposed political arena that comes across as the major agent of cultural change. "Under such a [two-party] scenario, the polarisation of understanding of the corruption-related debate is a virtually uncontested certainty, and competing obligations often distort or reinterpret events, respectively reinforcing the parallel realities different segments of the population seem to be living in."

Two domineering political parties, and two different worldviews for one island - Mercieca rightfully points out it is political parties who benefit the most from this confusion, "flying under the radar of regulation, especially with respect to party funding".

But doesn't the press also play a major role in uncovering abuses of public office and similar allegations of corruption?

Public policy expert Godfrey Pirotta claims that media bosses do little to continually challenge governments to explain, let alone resign. But he concedes that politicians have no need to fear the press "as they expect that at least half the media will somehow come to their support, either through its silence or by diversionary tactics. But freedom and democracy cannot truly exist without a reasonably, if not truly, free press. Loyalty to the liberal-democratic state must transcend loyalty to the party".

A faux-liberal democracy

As Pirotta explains, Malta claims to be a liberal-democracy with a Constitution to match, and yet accountability on the island tends to be frequently conspicuous by its very absence.

"Why do we still have, after decades of responsible government, a semblance rather than the substance of liberal-democratic government? Why is it that our media continues to be inundated with situations of alleged abuses of power but nonetheless heads do not roll, if not fall?" Pirotta asks.

Perhaps he himself answers his own question, having already pointed out that (in a previous work cited by Mercieca) long-standing clientelist arrangements create expectations that governments must meet if they are to retain support, recreating the patron-client relationship through the very political structure on which it depends.

On the face of it, the dominance of public life by the party men and women gives the political exoskeleton a red and blue tinge. Pirotta rightfully points out that even the host of so-called independent bodies in Malta fail to give the public any semblance of trust to ensure that accountability does indeed take place in public life. The membership of the Broadcasting Authority, for example, remains shared out between the political parties "in direct opposition to the spirit, if not the letter of the Constitution itself". In the case of the Permanent Commission for the Investigation of Corruption, the lack of resources afforded to this watchdog has "forfeited any public trust which it might have enjoyed".

Even in the case of the sterling work by the National Audit Office and the Office of the Ombudsman, Pirotta says compliance by the government of recommendations from these two bodies has often been half-hearted.

And his pointed observation also goes straight to the heart of Malta's political class, when he compares foreign government ministers who have found themselves on their way to prison for losing sight of their ethical conduct.

"In Malta such an event is seen as inconceivable. Our politicians, and many of their hangers-on and officials, see themselves and are seen by their electorates and the public in general to be above the law. No matter the seriousness of the scandal they are certain the 'Go to Jail' card in their game of political monopoly was never inserted in the pack."

Perhaps this is where a phenomenon like Nationalist MP Franco Debono comes in. In a blind fury of political zeal, fuelled by his earnest belief in his individual self-worth, Debono championed issues such as party-financing reform as part of his public, as well as personal, fight against the domineering ethos of big parties like his own, and also big men like PN leader and prime minister Lawrence Gonzi.

And yet, when the copy of a prospective party-financing law was presented to the Council of Europe's Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO) in October 2011, it was revealed that the law would allow anonymous donations made by political party members, and set a very high ceiling (€10,000) for the publication of the names of other donors.

GRECO strongly objected to the distinction between party and non-party members and described the proposed €10,000 threshold for the publication of the names of other donors as "critically high". Subsequently, the government backtracked from these proposals, insisting that MP Franco Debono - who had been previously entrusted by the Prime Minister to draft the law - had already changed the law seen by GRECO, and that the draft was now being fine-tuned by experts.

Reversing an accepted reality

But what to do about corruption and trading in influence inside the political class? As Pirotta notes, it's the electorate that also returns MPs and ministers to power in seemingly tacit approval of their behaviour. "A number of politicians who in a politically sane society would have been booted out by the electors long ago, still grace our premier institution."

Keith Mercieca also points out that cronyism and patronage are rife in the run-up to elections. "The political system itself encourages and breeds that sustained, personal relationship between client and patron, and this has now been further accentuated following the decentralisation of power through local councils."

As one participant tells Mercieca in his study, the smallness factor is at play yet again in local councils: "The inflated sense of self-importance is manifested in the multitude of mayors and councillors this small island has been divided into" - a shocking reminder that perhaps decentralisation has not helped stem, but fuelled further patronage and clientelistic arrangements.

Pirotta posits several recommendations in the fight for greater accountability. The first is a public debate on the fundamental principles of Malta's liberal democracy, but more important is his second point - raising government institutions above party political level. "This means that the idea of the State as distinct from party government is re-affirmed and the two entities currently so totally enmeshed, separated." Thirdly, greater powers must be given to institute investigations independently of the government executive, whereby NAO investigations, for example, can take place without authority from Castille or any other ministry. He couples this with the use of parliamentary committees of investigate abuses and enforce ministers to answer parliamentary questions and table papers requested in the House.

Authors and experts all pay tribute to the roles and the need to strengthen the Public Accounts Committee and the NAO, and enact a strong Whistleblowers Act, but Mercieca also chips in with the need for greater education against corruption:

"The influential role of education and an ever-increasing awareness of our civic duties and interdependence provide the ideal springboard for instituting the changes required in redressing misconstrued public attitudes towards corruption.

"In corruption, inaction is clearly perceived as a form of action, and failure to take a moral standpoint in what is essential a moral issue undermines efforts at driving forward desired form."