Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1493026
maltatoday | SUNDAY •19 FEBRUARY 2023 9 INTERVIEW 'inversely proportional to reality' 'nine'; then down to 'two'; etc., etc. On average, however: Malta's homicide rate, since 2004, has always stood at around 1.7 [per 100,000 persons]. And there has been no change to that trend, in our latest report. But what happens is that there will be, for example, two shock- ing murders, both occurring within a very short time of each other: and people will under- standably become… I don't want to say 'paranoid'; but let's say, 'jittery', or 'afraid'. And social media has also played a crucial role: the fact that so many crimes are now be- ing filmed by onlookers, for in- stance; and that the footage itself is accessible online, instantly, at the click of a mouse… Not only does this make those individual crimes a lot more 'vis- ible', than they would otherwise have been: but people also get to see the effects of the crime itself, first-hand… I think I can see what you're driving at: in the Pelin Kaya video, for instance, the body of the victim herself could be seen – albeit blurred-out – just moments after having been killed…. Precisely. And this also has the effect of accentuating the sheer horror of that crime; with the in- evitable result that… yes, people are certainly going to feel more 'unsafe', after watching that video. So it's not really all that surprising, that these individual crimes would have such an im- pact on the public's perception that 'Malta is becoming more dangerous', than it really is. But how dangerous IS Malta, really, from a criminology per- spective? How do you yourself interpret the raw statistics – in- cluding that '14,133' figure you just mentioned? Well: the figure of '14,133 crimes in one year' is a lot lower than it used to be, up until a few years ago. More significantly, however: it is also much lower than we ourselves had predicted, in view of the rising population. Because what usually happens, when there is rapid population growth, is that there will be an expected increase – not a de- crease – in reported crime. And in fact, there are parallels with this phenomenon here, too: but only in certain areas. For ex- ample: while the crime rate has generally fallen, across Malta – despite the fact that the popu- lation has grown by 200,000, in the last 15 years - statistics show that in Gozo, crime has actually increased by 8%. Again, however: it's not neces- sarily only because 'more crimes have been committed in Gozo', compared to previous years. It's also partly because the popula- tion of Gozo has increased, and become very 'diversified', over a relatively short period of time. And this has had the effect of more crimes actually being re- ported to the police, than before. In other words, the culture of 'omerta' is changing. The Northwest of Malta, in gener- al, is classed more as a 'rural' environment, than an 'urban/ metropolitan' one; and Gozo, in particular, suffers from dou- ble-insularity, in this regard. In such environments, people usually tend to take the law into their own hands: in the sense of, "You scratch my car, I'll deflate your tyres", and so on. But all that is changing. Gozo's population is now much larg- er, and more diverse: including Maltese and non-Maltese resi- dents alike. People are therefore more inclined to report crimes to the police, than they used to be in the past. It could, admit- tedly, be because 'locals' are re- porting 'non-locals', or vice-ver- sa – even though 'non-locals' are themselves in the process of becoming 'locals', even as we speak – but whatever the case: the statistics show that more crimes are being reported in Gozo today, than previously. And this is what we want: not that 'more crimes happen', of course; but that 'people report crimes, more'. Because with- out crimes being reported, we would not be able to come up with 'trends'; and the police would have nothing to actually work with, even on a tactical/ strategic level… At the same time, however: what you're saying seems to contradict popular perceptions on other issues, apart from crime. Like the police, for in- stance. Earlier, you mentioned a 'transformation' that has tak- en place in the Force; but apart from the 'new uniforms'… That was just a cosmetic change … Precisely: apart from such purely cosmetic changes, the police themselves have also been demanding 'better pay', 'better working conditions', etc.; and elsewhere, we hear talk of a Police Force that is totally 'demotivated', to the extent that senior officers are apparently 'resigning by the truck-load'. How can any of this be possible, if – as you say – the same Police Force is also 'finding its feet'? That's a very good question. But let's see where those per- ceptions are actually coming from: starting with the so-called 'Exodus' [of senior officers]. When you look at the different departments within the Police Force, you will find that the ar- eas which registered the high- est number of departures, were mainly in the 'high-end, finan- cial crime' department. In this sector, there are banks, regulatory authorities, and private financial institutions – among other entities – all competing for the same, limited talent-pool of people. Basical- ly, they're all looking for can- didates with the right level of professional expertise, in areas such as 'money-laundering', and so on… So the private sector is 'poach- ing' officers from the Police's Fi- nancial Crimes Unit? Not just the private sector – it happens between government departments, too. But yes, it happens. And that, alone, al- ready explains quite a lot about why there are so many depar- tures, this particular sector of the Police Force. As for the 'demotivation' claim: obviously, it is true that – in an organisation which em- ploys over 2,000 people – there will always be individual police officers who are 'demotivated', or 'disgruntled'; just as there will always be employees who choose to leave the Force, from time to time. This is normal, in such a large institution. But whoever is saying that the entire Police Force is 'demoti- vated', should really have a look at some of the surveys that have been published, as part of the ongoing transformation strat- egy. Because if there really is such a lack of drive, within the Police: why are so many young civilians – mostly, graduates in criminology, financial analysis, etc. – now applying for posts, that were previously only ever held by police officers? The Forensic Unit, for exam- ple, is now 'half-and-half': half police officers, and half civilians. That changes a lot; so this part of the transformation strategy, at least, is clearly working. What irks me the most, how- ever, is when people who wield a high level of influence – such as politicians, business leaders, etc. – simply echo popular percep- tions, such as 'the Police Force is demotivated'; or 'the crime rate is exploding'… without actually consulting any of the available scientific data on the subject. Take the recent Parliamentary debate on crime, for example: which was, 1) childish; 2) hor- rendous; and 3) absurd. If there is an academic report, which states – on the basis of statistical evidence – that the crime rate is decreasing… you cannot just ig- nore it altogether, and argue in Parliament that the crime rate is not only 'going up'; but that we even have a 'plague' [of crime]! Now: the philosophy I myself subscribe to, as an academ- ic, is that: if you want to make a statement, I will give you all the raw data you need; and you can work on that data, and then draw your own conclusions. But whatever conclusions you draw: they still have to be based on the raw scientific data, if they are to have any value. Be- cause once an influential person starts repeating all the 'popular perceptions', without paying any attention to the reality on the ground… that becomes in- grained in the public psyche. And the result is 'moral panic'. This is why so many people – even when confronted with the facts – simply refuse to ever ac- cept those facts, which contra- dict their own perceptions. Not because the 'facts are wrong', of course; but simply because those facts do not reflect 'how they themselves feel'…