AG files counter protest against Ombudsman

● Judicial letter cites 2003 example where army complainant was redirected to AFM by Ombudsman

The Attorney General, on behalf of the Ministry of Home Affairs, has filed a judicial counter protest against the Ombudsman.

On 13 June, the Ombudsman filed a judicial protest against the minister and his permanent secretary. Reacting to the Ombudsman’s judicial protest, Dr Mallia had said he would be filing a counter protest. The protest was filed yesterday.

The protest pointed out that Article 12 (3)(B) Chapter 385 of the Ombudsman Act states that before a complaint is filed at the office of the Ombudsman, one must exhaust all other revenues to find a solution.

Article 160 chapter 220 of the Armed Forces of Malta Act states that a complaint must first be made to the Commander of the Armed Forces and then to the President of Malta, meaning that it is only in the event a solution is not found internally that the President is notified.

In the judicial protest, the ministry cited a complaint filed on October 2003 as an example where the Ombudsman had stated in a letter sent to an army complainant that since there are other means of redress in his case, his complaint is not admissible for investigation in accordance with the Ombudsman Act.

“As you may know, complaints by officers are regulated by Section 160 of Malta Forces Act 1970 Section 2; AFM complaining officers so requires that the Commander shall, through the Minister, make his report or the complaint to the President of Malta.”

Regarding the same case, the Ombudsman had written an- other letter to the officer, which stated: “I have already had the occasion to inform you that I decline to accept your complaint for investigation for the reasons given to you repeatedly in my previous letters.”

“Forthcoming the receipt of your lawyer’s letter, I intervened with the Army so as to ensure that you will not be deprived of the opportunity to exercise your rights as provided for in Section 160 of the MAFA Act.”

‘I confirm my decision to decline to investigate your complaint on which you continue to insist. You have still the opportunity to have recourse to the means of seeking redress available under the Armed Forces Act.”

In a nutshell, the ministry said that the Ombudsman had no authority to investigate complaints by commissioned officers as these had other remedies available to them if they had any complaints.

Before 2011, no procedure regulating the process of majors and Lt Colonels existed and all promotions were based on recommendations only.

In 2011, a Senior Ranks Appointments’ Advisory Committee was set up.