Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/831240
maltatoday, THURSDAY, 1 JUNE 2017 17 M any music artists throughout the decades produced one good track but then lose the plot. In their moment of glory, their track would have gone up the charts to a very successful ranking but then get completely forgotten into oblivion as their musical package in their albums and the quality of their subsequent career would leave a lot to be desired. It could also be that once they got their dose of publicity they craved and worked for, it would have been enough and decide to move on. The current Labour government, elected with the hugest majority in terms of votes since independence after much pomposity and fanfare, shares a lot of parallels with one hit wonders in the music industry. Once they reached the top everything started to go topsy turv y. Not due to bad luck or unforeseen circumstances, nor due to in- competence only but out of sheer egoism and urge to get as much of it as possible while the limelight lasts. After the Russia tampering allegations, a statement which has gone round the world, again for all the wrong reasons, Muscat made a shocking statement. For every real, functioning democracy to work, there must be a separation between the administra- tive, legislative and he judiciary. During his interview with Saviour Balzan on Xtra on the Maltese National TV station, Muscat stated that if he were to lose the election and the judicial inquiry into the Egrant allegations prove to be unfounded, the magis-trate would have to bear responsibility. This is a loud alarm bell on many levels. A Prime Minister, in any democracy (or not for that matter) has absolutely no say in pressuring or recommending what a judge or magistrate should do in any way. Besides exceeding his remit and exercising undue pressure, this was nothing more than a threat, not only to the concerned magistrate but also to Maltese democracy as we know it. This was a stark confirmation, that if elected for another term, Muscat has absolutely no intention to be a fair Prime Minister and ensuring that the country's democratic structures work as they should in a correct manner. Like his preferred friends and fel-low leaders in semi democratic states, he has no interest in gaining power with the aim of delivering a common good and cleaning the country's reputation. In this admission Muscat made it clear that all he craves is power at whatever the cost and whatever the consequence. Let us be clear; Muscat, in an attempt to show inex-istent brawn, seems to be trying to demonize the existing democratic structures which ensure our fundamental rights and freedoms. Lost in all these issues he created himself, Muscat can barely talk about policy. His press conferences and interviews he gives (where applicable one must say) have be-come nothing more than a damage limitation exercise which has gone all wrong. Let's be clear Muscat has shown that if elected it will be not just be more of the same cor-ruption and nepotism but he aims to notch things up quite substantially. Last week also characterised the Forza Nazzjonali's formal electoral programme launch. I emphasize on the word formal as the PN throughout its term in opposition has come up with new policies, discussed them with the public and launched various documents years in advance before the election. The public hence knows what to ex-pect, with certainty, a clear vision and above all no nasty surprises or unexpected pit-falls. Joseph Muscat had his four years of fame which through calling an early election, wrote his own destiny. Despite the 36000 seat majority, a huge cabinet and a nine seat advantage over the opposition, he made such a mess and miscalculation over his own destiny and the reputational damage Malta has suffered, that he did not have the ability to continue governing for the terms he was supposed to govern for. Like a desperate pop star trying to cling on to the charts, after a humiliating first tour, he is trying to use this election to cling onto power. But what done is done. His time is up, his tune is no longer appreciated, he showed his worth was deemed to be disap- pointing at best, humiliating at worst. Mark Azzopardi is a PN candidate on the 9 and 12 districts News/Opinion One hit wonder Lost in all these issues he created himself, Muscat can barely talk about policy. His press conferences and interviews he gives (where applicable one must say) have be-come nothing more than a damage limitation exercise which has gone all wrong Mark Azzopardi extradition requests taken out of their bank ac- count than they wished, but only £2,600 was left in the Jons Trust account. In the subsequent police investiga- tion, it transpired that Spiteri had convinced another client, Gaetano Borg, to lend some €230,000 to another client. The other client knew noth- ing of the alleged loan, and Borg, who is illiterate, signed a document allowing Spiteri to withdraw his money. Stuart Creggy In 2004, Creggy's lawyer Joseph Schembri reported Spiteri to the police, saying he had refused to pay back his client some €1.3 million he should have deposited for him. The funds were trans- ferred from clients Sarasin Bank to Spiteri's Lombard Bank Malta account from a foreign company by the name of K.E. Davis & Sons. Spiteri was arraigned in the court of Antonio Micallef Trigona, and the case is now in the de- fence stage. Creggy, a former solici- tor now in his 70s, was last year ordered to pay more than £760,000 (€1 million) compensation for approv- ing an unauthorised transfer of funds. Relations between Creggy and restaurant-chain owners Jeffrey and Peter Bar- nett, for whom he acted for over 25 years, broke down af- ter the transfer of more than £760,000 to Spiteri, from whom they never recovered any funds. Leslie Bricusse The double Oscar win- ner engaged Spiteri to invest £150,000 (€200,000) in 2001 but it transpired that the stocks allegedly bought by Spiteri had never been issued for sale, and that documents sent to Bricusse were false. In 2004, Spiteri was charged with aggravated misappro- priation. Guilio Gherardini In 2004, the Italian plas- tic surgeon was advised by Spiteri to draw up a contract with his employers – the Na- tional Centre of Cosmetic Surgery – to place his salary in his trust, Zimmermann International. Spiteri assured him that his taxes were be- ing duly paid but it transpired that his money was not being forwarded to Zimmermann International. Spiteri was ar- raigned before Magistrate Micallef Trigona for non-pay- ment of Gherardini's taxes, and the case is now in the de- fence stage. Peter Clarke, Patricia Clarke and Mario Somma In 2008, the Clarkes gave Spiteri €290,000 to invest in a capital-guaranteed fund us- ing a trust but later stopped receiving interest. A police investigation revealed that the money was being trans- ferred in an unauthorised manner to Jersey, the Chan- nel Islands and the UK and to a trust belonging to Spiteri. Similarly, Somma gave Spiteri €515,000 to invest through a Guernsey trust fund. Spiteri was arraigned before Magis- trate J. Demicoli, and the case is now in the defence stage. Having a swim: Spiteri at the Surrey home of the mother of his partner Lorna Maltby in a photo he posted on an online dating profile