The scandal the standards commissioner refused to see

Standards Commissioner Joseph Azzopardi declared that after an investigation into former tourism minister Clayton Bartolo’s lavish wedding, he found no wrongdoing. Except, it wasn’t really an investigation.  It was just a friendly chat between old pals, during which the Commissioner not only found excuses for the former minister but also attacked the press.

Instead of grilling Bartolo, the Commissioner showed the politician the kind of deference that can only be described as grovelling.  Commissioner Azzopardi even mocked his own staff during those interviews (access the report here). He cynically asked his Director General, Charles Polidano,   “Any questions from you, Charles, or are you going to keep quiet today?”

The Commissioner made entirely inappropriate comments during his interview with the former minister, which should disqualify him from occupying the post.  The Commissioner flippantly commented that no matter what Bartolo did, “they would still badmouth him”.

Presumably, “they” are those nasty journalists who flagged Bartolo’s potential conflict of interest.  The Commissioner accused “the papers” of asking the former minister “awkward questions”. He justified Bartolo’s failure to pay a deposit despite booking a wedding party costing over €100,000.

The Commissioner stopped his own staff from asking further questions, saying, “Ehmm, then on this question we don’t need to continue”. Bizarrely, he shared his own personal experience with Bartolo during his “interrogation”.

“I went through it myself”, Azzopardi commented, “not me personally, not my wedding, my daughter’s wedding, and it wasn’t so long ago”.

When Bartolo, who invited 1,000 guests, tried to downplay the size of the event by claiming only 800 attended, the Commissioner lent his support, stating, “That always happens to you, it always happens”. He added, “In fact, when you go to order food, you tell him, listen, I have 1,000 guests and they calculate for you, eh, he tells you, 150 won’t turn up”.

Commissioner Azzopardi didn’t conduct any investigation. He simply met Clayton Bartolo and an employee of DB group, Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Jean Claude Fenech.  DB group operates Sea Bank hotel. They were given the former ITS prime site at St George’s Bay and just gained approval to add another seven floors to their monstrous towers.

They manage Manta by the Sea, the Tigne’ Lido, where Bartolo held his wedding. That very site was subject to enforcement action by the Planning Authority for its illegalities.  That alone should have raised red flags.

But nothing elicits Commissioner Azzopardi’s suspicions. Instead, the Commissioner showed clear bias in favour of the man he was meant to investigate and against the media.

The transcription of that meeting indicates that the Commissioner had already decided to exonerate Bartolo before he’d heard the evidence.  He didn’t bother calling any other witnesses.

When the DB group CFO told the Commissioner that over €100,000 was what it usually cost to host 1,000 guests at Manta by the Sea on a Friday night, on the eve of a public holiday, which required shutting down a whole restaurant, providing all the food, drinks and entertainment, including an after-party, the Commissioner took his word for it.

He made no checks, not even a back-of-the-envelope estimate.  If he had, he’d realise that kind of party would cost at least double that amount.

But Commissioner Azzopardi simply overlooked all the suspicious details, brushed aside all the unanswered questions and closed his ‘investigation’, exonerating Bartolo.

Bartolo’s wedding was held on 28 June 2024, the evening of l-Imnarja. The suspicious DB group invoice for €100,000 was issued that same day. So it seems DB didn’t wait to check what was consumed or whether any damage was caused to the venue, as was stipulated in the contract supposedly signed between Bartolo and SRGN Co Ltd.

What’s even more suspicious is that the invoice included no details whatsoever, just two identical line items – “Wedding @ MANTA 28.06.24” – one for €55,932.20 and another for €37,288.14 and a further €16,779.66 in VAT bringing a round total of €110,000.  No breakdown of what went on food, drink, venue rental, costs for closing the restaurant, entertainment, permits, security and fireworks.

On 1 July 2024, the complaint reached the Commissioner.  On 4 July he wrote to Bartolo about it.   We do not know what the Commissioner told Bartolo because the Commissioner didn’t publish his letter.  We don’t know whether Bartolo was given a deadline.  What we know is that Bartolo only replied six weeks later, on 22 August.

He certainly couldn’t reply before 14 August 2024, because Bartolo hadn’t paid a cent until then.  According to the contract, Bartolo was meant to settle all dues within 30 days.  He didn’t. He only transferred €110,000 to the company six weeks after his wedding – after he found out about the complaint against him.

The Commissioner’s investigation was a whitewash. He insisted there was nothing suspicious about Bartolo never paying any deposit because “in this case, you have to understand, this is a person you knew, I mean.”

The Commissioner produced his own justification for the suspiciously bare invoice – “There is no particular reason why there is no breakdown of this amount because you would have agreed the sum beforehand”.  He even justified the suspiciously low price, claiming. “You know, this isn’t a small sum… when we say drink, it’s not just water… spirits etcetera… beer and so on… type of whisky especially… and whisky is much more expensive, I think… and wine”.

“Naturally, the Honourable (former) Minister Bartolo, you knew… he is a well-known person…”, the Commissioner told DB’s CFO. Instead of asking the questions, the Commissioner provided all the answers.

When DB’s CFO couldn’t say whether Bartolo contacted DB’s “top management” or who he’d contacted about his wedding reception, the Commissioner provided his own excuse to the CFO: “You have a lot of employees, I imagine, don’t you?”

When Bartolo played the victim, stating “The only option I had was either not to get married or to get married overseas”, the Commissioner replied, “and then they’ll talk about you anyway”.

When an investigator from the Commissioner’s office apologised to the Minister for asking “an awkward question,” the Commissioner commented, “that’s what the papers’ questions were”.

The Standards Commissioner has no business protecting the politicians he’s meant to investigate. He certainly has no business disparaging the press for holding politicians to account. The longer he remains in his role, the more intractable the damage he inflicts on our democracy.