Together Gibraltar says the Government and the GSD’s “debate” on the basis of Attorney General’s actions, in regard to the 36 North case, “is nothing but a speculative, semantic contest.” 

A statement from Together Gibraltar follows below:

Considering none of the involved parties will disclose the criteria explained by the AG  for triggering a “Nolle Prosequi” on the 36 North case, the debate on whether the  AG’s actions were based on “national security”, as claimed by the CM, or on “political  public interest” as claimed by the GSD, is nothing but a speculative, semantic  contest. 

Together Gibraltar issued a statement on the matter last week expressing a critical  view of the actions of the AG, but has, since the public and media development of  this controversy, taken the view that, when appeals to, be it national security or the public interest, as were made by the AG (who is presumed free from party-political  agency), the public debate must be handled in a responsible and measured way. To  push harder, and thus risk further undermining the credibility of the Government’s  chief legal advisor, can set a dangerous precedent in the handling of the potential  public interest as well as national security risks. 

Furthermore, TG believes that this is not the crux of the issue at hand. One thing is  granting the AG the benefit of the doubt (to a reasonable degree), and another is  overlooking the many levels of impropriety which are transpiring from this case. In an  interview with GBC, Fabian Picardo admitted that it was his decision not to award the  contract to 36 North, a company we now know is partly owned by the partners of  Hassans. The CM tried to counterbalance his obvious conflict of interest on this issue  (as a partner of the firm) by dragging Daniel Feetham, a political opponent and also  partner of Hassans, into the same camp. 

Whether the CM acted to favour his own corporate interests or not on this issue is  important, but is not the most relevant piece of this puzzle. The main problem is an  underlying, systemic one. Unfortunately, because of the opaque handling of public  affairs and the limitations of our media ecosystem, the people of Gibraltar will never  have access to the truth of how public contracts are managed in Gibraltar, but what  is obvious to all is that they are handled opaquely, arbitrarily and with little  consideration to conflicts of interest. 

In a mature, functioning democracy, the CM would have never been involved in the  decision to grant a contract (or not) to a company of which he is linked through  corporate partnerships. In Gibraltar, he candidly admits that he makes these  decisions just to get out of a sticky predicament. 

On Monday, TG issued a press statement reiterating its accusations that  Government lied on the deal to purchase LFT’s via a local middle-man. Government,  after having denied what had become patently obvious, decided to not comment  further on the issue. 

Lies and mismanagement in the handling of public contracts should be intolerable in  any self respecting democracy. TG is convinced that the handling of the LFT affair,  together with the CM’s admissions of involvement in the handling of the Blands/36  North contract, should be enough to trigger major political backlash. 

Unfortunately, until we address our systemic failure to limit the arbitrary,  unscrutinised exercise of power by politicians, the mismanagement of public funds  will continue without consequences.