It seems unfortunate that the news that the Permanent Executive Bureau of the International Police Association will be holding next year’s first meeting in Malta coincided with the reporting of a press conference about allegations of brutality by our local force.
The association’s fundamental principles and aims are derived from its motto in Esperanto - Servo Per Amikeco (Service Through Friendship).
The association’s objectives include the development of social, cultural and professional links among its members, in an environment free from discrimination of ranks, sex, race, colour, language or religion and enhancing the image of the police in the countries of its sections and improving relations with the public.
The police have a tough job, but sometimes either through pressure, inexperience, or, it has to be said, thuggishness, they attract public concern and even hostility.
There is no doubt, and it is unfortunate, that the force does tend to attract a number of men with a low tolerance threshold and limited intellect, which can sometimes lead to thuggish behaviour.
One cannot tar all within the police force with the same brush, but it is common knowledge that there are police officers in nearly every country that can be brutal at worst and plain rude at best.
That is probably why the association, obviously made up of the right kind of police officer, works towards improving the force’s image.
We are all shocked when we see scenes of police brutality, in many cities around the world, on our television screens at demonstrations or protests.
And although, thankfully, not all officers are seen as racist, sexist and violent, there is no doubt that an element of these negative traits do exist in the force.
That is why the public is alerted when a case of alleged brutality hits the headlines.
The latest local case has triggered so much speculation that one has a problem distinguishing between fact and fiction.
I remember thinking it was rather odd, that a man had fallen off the bastions at the police headquarters while trying to escape, when I read the story before I left Malta to attend the German travel mart.
My thoughts were that jumping off a bastion was more of a suicide rather than an escape attempt. So did he jump or did he fall? I had made a mental note to follow the story up when I got back.
On the plane back on Wednesday afternoon, I saw that it was on The Times front page, although the story broke on this newspaper last Sunday, while I was away.
It was MaltaToday that organised the press conference where the alleged victim’s father and brother gave their version of events.
They claimed that Nicholas Azzopardi was beaten then thrown off the bastions by the police and produced a video of Mr Azzopardi, where he related his version of what happened to him while in police custody.
Although the Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister had on Sunday said that they would wait for the outcome of the magisterial inquiry before ordering an investigation into the allegations, just before the press conference on Tuesday, the Home Affairs Ministry announced that Judge Albert Manche had been appointed to investigate the allegations and ascertain whether there had been abuse of power.
The fact that Home Affairs Minister, Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, had initially only got his information through the media indicates that the Police Commissioner wanted to keep the story under wraps. It is also odd that the Commissioner did not instigate an internal inquiry, which one would have thought a death while in police custody would have warranted, even if a magisterial inquiry was in hand. Magistrate Tonio Vella had a long interview with Mr Azzopardi three hours before he passed away.
However, it is concerning that the enquiring magistrate took so long (four days), considering the seriousness of both Mr Azzopardi’s condition and his allegations, before interviewing him in hospital and that the interview was not recorded. The excuses given (confusion) for not recording the interview are not justified.
That is probably why the authorities felt that a further investigation was necessary.
The Police here are not very communicative at the best of times; however, if they want to improve their public image they have to start opening up.
Giving out bits of information late in the day will only further speculation.
For example, why did the fact that a police officer had been injured at some point not been revealed earlier, except allegedly by the police to Mr Azzopardi’s brother the day he allegedly fell.
The Times reported on Thursday that police sources (Who are they and why do they do not want their names mentioned?) told the paper that a policeman was slightly injured trying “to save Nicholas Azzopardi from jumping off a wall”. Why was this not released at the same time as the report of the fall?
It would have been better had the Police Commissioner held a press conference immediately and given all the facts of the matter.
In his recorded message before his death, Mr Azzopardi gave a different version. He said that he had pushed a police officer against a wall in self-defence when the officers were pushing him around. His action provoked a kicking by another officer, which left him severely injured and unconscious, he claimed.
According to the police sources (whoever they may be) said on Wednesday that the officer was treated in hospital for scratches on his forearms and chest injuries, “which the doctor confirmed were exactly compatible with somebody trying to hold onto someone hanging from a wall”, the sources told The Times.
What is the doctor’s name? And how did he come to the conclusion that the injuries “were exactly compatible with somebody trying to hold onto someone hanging from a wall”? One should also bear in mind that this statement did not come from the horse’s mouth but through police sources.
The police are denying all the allegations and have said that the hospital has records of Mr Azzopardi being taken to hospital twice suffering from chest pains between 9 pm on Tuesday April 8 and 4 am on the next day. They claim that had Mr Azzopardi sustained the alleged injuries before then, the hospital staff would have obviously noticed.
However, the alleged beating could have taken place on Wednesday between 4 am and 6 pm: the alleged time of the fall.
The police claim that CCTV footage shows Mr Azzopardi walking normally while crossing the yard. It shows Mr Azzopardi peering over the wall, but unaccountably the camera footage stops there, and after that we have the police version of what happened.
The police also claim that the results of the post mortem, which had not yet been released, showed that the injuries were not compatible with a beating but with a fall.
Should not the police have waited for the release of the post mortem before making such statements? Again another statement from a police source rather than the direct authority.
Besides, the family have said that they would be asking for a fresh autopsy if not convinced by the results of the first forensic report.
Apparently, aspersions on Mr Azzopardi have been published leading to comments online. Although the reasons for his being called to the police depot might throw some light on how the police might have handled the case, the immediate matter in hand is that he was found seriously injured in a ditch under the bastions while in police custody.
One hopes that the investigations will unravel the conflicting views of what took place and come up with the truth.
The public needs to be convinced that our police officers are not above the law.

pamelapacehansen@gmail.com