Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1521306
16 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 26 MAY 2024 LETTERS & LAW Letters to the Editor Law Report After the gluttony what have Maltese patients been left with? THE information that has been emerg- ing in titbits from the inquiry into the Vitals hospitals deal is shocking. I get the impression that the very same peo- ple we trusted to run the country were more interested in taking care of their personal interests as they negotiated three public hospitals. The private agreements made with shady characters; the emails exchanged on private channels; the secretive com- panies set up in Dubai and Panama; the consultancy agreements; the millions of euros in tax money that went to obscure investors, who quickly shared the mon- ey between them in questionable con- sultancies and brokerage fees; the bogus work carried out to justify suspicious payments… and in all this, the biggest loser was the public. The new Gozo hospital that had to be built remained a figment of our collective imagination; the refurbished St Luke's Hospital that had to serve as a hub for medical tour- ism remained a pipe dream; and the up- graded Karin Grech Hospital remained a wish and nothing more. We should all be asking ourselves, after the gluttony, what have Maltese patients been left with? The pure and simple fact is that none of what was promised from the hospitals deal was delivered. It is shameful that people like Konrad Mizzi, Keith Schembri, and Joseph Mus- cat reneged on their duty to safeguard the interests of the State… our interests. The wheeling and dealing involved; the money that exchanged hands between key play- ers; the sheer scale of gluttony is unprec- edented. I feel let down as a taxpayer who has always paid his dues on time to see public funds squandered in such a way. I just hope that justice is served to all those who sought to profit from the Vitals scandal by indulging in corrupt practices. I will not hold my breath though. D. Portelli Birkirkara When will Zejtun- Marsaskala road works finish? WHEN will the road works at Triq id-Daħla ta' San Tumas in Żejtun be ready? The works, concentrated on just a short section of this road have been dragging on for months now. Apart from the inconvenience caused to residents of this street, cars travelling to Marsaskala from Żejtun are being rerouted through several side streets not designed to cater for such heavy traffic and this is causing road surface damage elsewhere. The authorities must get their act together and complete these works as quickly as possible and ideally before the summer starts when this road serves as an important link to St Thomas Bay. D. Spiteri Marsaskala THE law provides a list of subjects that have to be covered for a person to obtain a warrant in accountancy. This was held in Evgeuni Bodishtianu vs Accountan- cy Board decided on 20 May 2024. The Administrative Review Tribunal was presided over by Magistrate Charmaine Galea. In his application, the Applicant, Ev- geuni Bodishtianu, explained that he was appealing from a decision of the Accountancy Board in terms of Article 15A of the Accountancy Profession Act. He further explained that in 2021 he ap- plied to receive a warrant to practice as an accountant. This was turned down a few months later. Therefore, he asked the Tribunal to order that his Russian degree be recognised by the Maltese authority that regulates advanced and higher education. He complained that the Board did not give any reason for the rejection. The Accountancy Board held that it followed the law and if the warrant was granted it would have been a dangerous precedent. For a person to be granted a warrant he or she should have finished the course at the University of Malta or else its equivalent in another education- al institute. The Board pointed out that the qualification the Applicant present- ed was a diploma achieved after a two- year course. The Board denied not giv- ing reasons and had indicated the article of law upon which it based its decision. The Tribunal looked at the Applicant's testimony where he explained that he had been living in Malta for the past 27 years and held the position of director of a number of companies. He works as an accountant. He held that he has a degree from the Russian University of Econom- ics, in which he had credits in accounts. The Malta Authority of Further and Higher Education recognised that this was classified as MQF Level 6. The Secretary of the Board also tes- tified. He explained how warrants are awarded. The Applicant's qualifications were not equivalent to the ACCA cal- culator, which is the yard stick for the Board. He stressed that it is the Board which decides on the professional qual- ifications independently from the Malta Authority of Further and Higher Educa- tion. The Applicant did not have a de- gree majoring in accountancy. His first degree was in Theatre Arts. He held that there were other Russians who applied and were given a warrant because they had the ACCA qualifications. The Chairman of the Board testified and pointed out that the course the Ap- plicant attended was of only two years, while the course in Malta is five. The ACCA qualification is equivalent to the course done at the University of Malta. The Tribunal first considered the alle- gation that no explanation was given for the Applicant's rejection for a warrant. The Tribunal held that the letter point- ed at Article 3(2c) of the Accountancy Profession Act. In fact, that Applicant replied to the letter stated that he was in fact qualified. In turn the Board replied to the letter. The Tribunal held that it was the Board who had to analyse the applica- tion. Its reply to the application was dry but it was correct. Article 3(2)(c) of the Accountancy Profession Act gives two criteria for a person to be given a war- rant. The first is if that person followed the course at the University of Malta or else had qualifications equivalent to that course. It was obvious that the Board was referring to the second qualifica- tion. The Board has its own method for checking whether one should be given a warrant based on the system used was to adopt the qualifications of ACCA. The Tribunal listed the subjects required for a person to be considered as qualified and compared it with the qualifications of the Russian University of Economics. In doing so the Tribunal agreed with the Board that the course the Applicant cov- ered had less academic subjects and as such he failed to prove that he was qual- ified as required by the law. The Tribunal then moved to turn down the appeal. Qualifications must be equal to that listed in the law LAW REPORT MALCOLM MIFSUD Mifsud & Mifsud Advocates