A communication problem
The Armed Forces of Malta has been rocked by another scandal, this time allegations of a ‘cocaine party’ that took place inside its Ħal Far barracks.
The case was revealed by a soldier who was sacked last year after a video of him making fun of a pointless gate installed by the army at its Pembroke ranges went viral. The soldier is challenging his dismissal in court and has been highly critical of army commander Jeffrey Curmi, putting up a long list of Facebook posts questioning the Brigadier’s leadership.
The AFM said on Monday that it had launched an internal investigation into the alleged party and that a soldier was sacked on the spot after he refused to be administered a urine test.
The other soldiers involved tested negative for drugs. The problem is that the alleged party took place more than two weeks ago and it is unclear whether the tests were done immediately or now. We say this because the army only issued a statement this week, after the allegations came out on social media.
Part of the problem is the army’s tradition of silence and opaqueness when it comes to media relations. While we understand that the armed forces cannot comment on each and every matter, and that there are sensitive issues that cannot be discussed openly, this lack of engagement with the media and the public often leads to increased speculation and suspicion.
So, for a start, more detailed answers should be provided and, yes, it would not be a bad idea for the army to hold press conferences every now and again. Over the past few months, the police force has made great strides forward when it comes to public relations, and the army would do well to follow suit.
Last year, the reputation of the army was dealt a heavy blow when two soldiers were charged with the racially-motivated murder of Lassana Cisse in Birżebbuġia. The murder had led to concerns about racism in the army’s ranks.
An internal inquiry was launched to determined whether this was the case and over 300 personnel were interviewed. The inquiry concluded that no signs of racial hatred or intolerance were found, but the document was never published.
We do not know what process was followed and, more specifically, what questions were asked and how the board came to that conclusion. The government has refused to publish that inquiry, and a Freedom of Information request submitted by this newsroom was refused.
Without such a document, it is hard to trust the results, particularly when some members of the force have openly posted racist comments on social media and are members of far-right Facebook groups. This is not to mention past cases where migrants died while in AFM custody.
We are, of course, not saying that all soldiers are racists or cocaine users. To the contrary, we believe that most soldiers are exemplary and dedicated. This newsroom has never shied away from promoting the countless service personnel who risk their lives to save others on a daily basis, with the most recent case being an expose on the AFM’s Air Wing.
It is, in fact, a pity that a few bad apples give a bad name to the entire force. But it is also a pity that the army deals with such cases in an opaque way that only serves to strengthen some people’s belief that all soldiers are gung-ho racists, when this is clearly not the case.
The AFM needs to get its communications act together.