Police Superintendent requests court to halt appointment of Assistant Commissioners

Kevin Schembri Orland A police superintendent yesterday filed a warrant of prohibitory injunction to halt the appointment of new assistant police commissioners, claiming that his right to a fair hearing had been breached by the Public Service Commission (PSC).

The court provisionally upheld the request.

Lawyers Jason Azzopardi, Kris Busietta and Julian Farrugia, representing Superintendent Carmelo Bartolo, said that a call for applications for the post of Assistant Commissioner was issued on 16 October 2016.

They said that on 17 January this year, the results of the process were published and Superintendent Bartolo was placed 15th out of 21 candidates, after the selection board – comprising Police Commissioner Lawrence Cutajar, Josie Brincat and Joseph Mangani – had concluded the selection process.

Superintendent Bartolo then filed a petition before the PSC on 29 January 2017, putting forward his complaints. It is here, the superintendent claims, that his rights to ‘equality of arms and fair hearing’ were breached.

On 27 February 2017, the superintendent was asked to provide a list of witnesses to substantiate his petition. This list had to be sent within two days and Superintendent Bartolo claims that this was done. The court request read that the Superintendent was then informed by the PSC that a sitting would be scheduled so that his testimony could be given.

On 14 March, the court application read, a sitting was held at which the superintendent requested a list of all the marks for the candidates who had applied for an assistant commissioner post. He claims to have done so in order to help strengthen his petition, but he says this was denied to him and transparency had been obscured by the Commission.

Superintendent Bartolo claims, that during the PSC sittings, he was asked to present a list of witnesses so that they could be heard. He complied with this request but his witnesses were not heard. The application reads: “In the two sittings held, the only opportunity the Superintendent had was to again verbally explain his complaint.”

In addition, the application states that requests made to the PSC so that the best defence and submissions could be made were denied for no valid reason.

Superintendent Bartolo said that on 3 May 2017, he was informed that his petition had been denied, and that the PSC considered the case closed.