Claudette Pace files judicial protest against PBS

Popular TV presenter Claudette Pace files judicial protest against PBS following decision to prohibit her from presenting daily show since becoming an official PN candidate.

Claudette Pace will contest elections with the Nationalist Party.
Claudette Pace will contest elections with the Nationalist Party.

Popular television presenter Claudette Buttigieg, formally known as Claudette Pace filed a judicial protest against PBS after its editorial board decided that she could no longer present her daily programme Sellili since she will contesting the general election on the PN ticket.

In the protest sent to the media, Buttigieg called on PBS to revise its decision and gave the national broadcaster 48 hours to reply to the protest.

She insisted that the editorial board should not have taken such a decision. Buttigieg added that she expected to be called by the station to discuss the matter in person.

In the protest, the presenter and singer explained that her candidature was officially approved on 17 September and one day later she received an e-mail from the PBS editorial board notifying her that she could not present her show after 1 October.

Buttigieg said the editorial board's decision was "arbitrary and without any basis." She insisted that the candidature will not have an impact on the quality of the show and Buttigieg also noted that her programme does not deal with political and current affairs.

The presenter said broadcasting was her only source of income and PBS was denying her livelihood by barring her from presenting the show on TVM.

The protest cited a judgement by the Court of Appeal on 31 May 2002 in the case John Bundy and Clyde Puli vs the Broadcasting Authority as a precedent which was very relevant to her case.

The court had declared that the intention to contest a general election was not sufficient basis for the Authority to stop somebody from working as a broadcaster.

The court had ruled that the Broadcasting Authority had exceeded its legal authority in stopping Bundy and Puli from exercising their profession as broadcasters when they were not official candidates but had only declared their intention to be candidates.

avatar
Luke Camilleri
Why must it always be THE NATIONAL STATION, aren't her talents appreciated on other stations , NET included? Why must it always be PBS???? At this rate PBS has fast become a Nationalist Party station not the NATIONAL STATION!
avatar
Frederick Cutajar
This is a gimmick - all in the name of "look at how impartial PBS is".
avatar
QUOTE: (1) The presenter said broadcasting was her only source of income and PBS was denying her livelihood by barring her from presenting the show on TVM. (2) The protest cited a judgement by the Court of Appeal on 31 May 2002 in the case John Bundy and Clyde Puli vs the Broadcasting Authority as a precedent which was very relevant to her case. COMMENT: On the first quote she should have thought of that before she decided to accept her nomination to be a PN contestant for the General Election. In regards the second comment referring to the Court of Appeal decision of May 31, 2002, this decision was against the Broadcasting Authority and not PBS. If she is allowed to continue presenting her program getting extra exposure during an election campaign, then PBS will be obliged to make available the same exposure to her competitors on her district whether they are contesting for the PN or the PL. Grow up Claudette because this looks like the story of the dog who saw his own shadow in the water and dropped the bone he had in order to try and claim the other bone he saw in the shadow. Can anyone imagine voting for such greed and arrogance.
avatar
dan it tijatrin kollu, imisa tamel succes daghqs kemm kienet ghamlet fil euro vision.