4 December 2007 Rating 3% No Comment  

Alternattiva Demokratika Secretary General and spokesman for Gozo, Victor Galea, has said that, "The comments made by Joseph Falzon of MEPA's Audit Officer confirm that the non-renewal of Architect Mr. Carmel Cacopardo's contract as an investigation officer at the MEPA Audit Office, was in part motivated by his participation in an AD activity. Mr Galea called for the immediate publication of various Audit Reports which till now have remained under wraps. He singled out the investigation on the Sant' Antnin Waste Recycling Plant at Marsascala. Mr Galea added, "Moreover an investigation should be conducted immediately into the meetings behind close doors held by the MEPA's chairman with developers, in order to establish what was discussed and decided and therefore whether the quasi-judicial function of the MEPA Board has been undermined." EXTRACTS FROM MEPA ANNUAL REPORT- MEPA AUDIT OFFICE ANNUAL REPORT OCTOBER 2006 - SEPTEMBER 2007 18. The MEPA Board categorically rejected my request to re-appoint Mr Cacopardo as investigating officer citing conflict of interest as its main justification. Two other reasons brought forward by MEPA were Mr Cacopardo's Chairing of a Consultation meeting organised by Alternattiva Demokratika on MEPA reform and an article published in the Times critical of MEPA both of which occurred on the 30 June 2007. Incidentally a few weeks before MEPA had permitted one of its Assistant Directors to chair a political meeting organised by the Party in Government. MEPA has within its ranks currently employed an Opposition Member of Parliament and various Local Councillors! 19. Mr Cacopardo had applied for the post of Director of Environment with the MEPA, but was not selected for the post. Mr Cacopardo believed that an injustice had been committed in his regard and asked the Ombudsman to investigate. He also voiced his complaint to the press where he also questioned the qualifications of the selected applicant and claimed discrimination in his regard. The Ombudsman did not accept the arguments of Mr Cacopardo. Consequently the MEPA claimed that the press statements of Mr Cacopardo rendered him not fit for the post of investigating officer at the Audit Office, where he might be required to investigate those persons to whom he referred in his letter to the press. 20. I categorically and emphatically reject all the claims of the MEPA in this regard. Mr Cacopardo carried out investigations under my instructions and supervision. He always referred the results of his investigations for my consideration, and no report was finalised and published before I was fully satisfied of its accuracy. All reports published by the Audit Office are fully available to the MEPA and the Minister. I would have no objection whatsoever to make them fully available to the public and the press for their scrutiny; they can judge for themselves whether the so-called "conflict of interest" exists or not. 21. Incidentally the objections of the MEPA Chairman to Mr Cacopardo commenced when with my approval he "dared" investigate the actions of the MEPA Chairman in meeting developers behind closed doors to discuss their pending applications. Details of this investigation were given in last year's report. http://www.mepa.org.mt/press/AnnReps/MEPA%20Annual%20Report%202007.pdf