Question Accountability situation Malta

[L13]

well, I am not defending anybody - just stating that yes, failures occur in every justice system.

Individuals being free? Maybe I need to make you aware that as far as I know, if you're referring to Castillo, he was never actually detained or arrested, thankfully, unless it was for a few hours to provide his version of events maybe on the day and in the following months as indicated in the court sentence where he gave his version of events a few times.

Our legal process doesn't drop you in jail automatically! In the first judgement which later got overturned his sentence was for a "suspended" sentence, which meant he would have ended up in jail for 2 years only if he committed a crime within 4 years. That wasn't applied in view of the appeal process which later cancelled the first court's conviction. Of course the whole process is taxing on the individual in question but it seems you might have misunderstood the events.

Oh, your argument is that it could have been worse but it wasn't, so everything is ok? His sentence was suspended, so it is ok that he was sentenced at all?

But actually, I was referring to the freedom of divers to dive as they see fit.

I don't think the current law is shackling anyone ...

But:

That it could be improved - of course! I remember a few years back there was a proposal that any diver over 60 had to get a medical done which to be honest, when seeing our accidents' high level data, may not have been necessarily a bad idea!

A horrible Idea that would shackle everyone over 60!
And:

We've had in the last few years much more stringent requirements imposed by the local hyperbaric chamber for diving medicals for instructors and now you need to meet the UK HSE standard to be given the yearly certificate for instructing / guiding.

Even more shackling! You seem to think you aren't shackling enough, lol.

I hope you realize you sound like a propaganda agent. Malta might be better served by being quiet and hoping we forget, than trying to convince us that what happened wasn't all that bad but actually just reminding us of the travesty that occurred there.

What actually would convince me to reconsider is Malta publicly stating that a
the travesty occurred, that it was an inexcusable travesty, and vowing to fix it. But trying to sweep it away just reminds us that it happened and that we can't trust the Maltese system, or it's proponents.

 

[SlugLife]

Mind you - not defending the legal system.

I am not defending anybody

You say that, but your posts are narrowly focusing on framing these incidents in the best possible light. For example:

no diver has yet been convicted following the first appeal

That's a very unusual thing to say. Usually, Id phrase that "The diver was charged, and convicted, but the conviction was overturned on appeal." The two cases I'm aware of, including Castillo and Steven Martin, it was ridiculous to charge them in the first place.

 

[BlueTrin]

@SlugLife @L13 @BoltSnap
Mind you - not defending the legal system. Unfortunately humans are there running it...

If I had to reform that system - and would be applicable to other sports as well, would be first a proper inquiry which makes use of multiple well versed experts and with a certain openness to evidence - which unfortunately in the local system only occurs when a case goes ahead. In most cases, what we get to know is what is reported in the press / court judgements, and through the hive.

One example would be something like what happens in the aviation industry. Proper public report, lessons to be learnt and as much as possible - separate from any criminal case unless it's a real case of utmost negligence.

Re diving centers laws: well, one primary concern at that time (and still crops up sometimes) is the possibility of individuals being unregulated & irresponsible. Imagine yourself as a tourist coming over and getting a service from someone who just evaporates if things go south...
On that matter, do you have knowledge or references to your applicable local laws/regulations for comparison? At some point updates could be called for.

Do you think the regulation

well, I am not defending anybody - just stating that yes, failures occur in every justice system.

Individuals being free? Maybe I need to make you aware that as far as I know, if you're referring to Castillo, he was never actually detained or arrested, thankfully, unless it was for a few hours to provide his version of events maybe on the day and in the following months as indicated in the court sentence where he gave his version of events a few times.

Our legal process doesn't drop you in jail automatically! In the first judgement which later got overturned his sentence was for a "suspended" sentence, which meant he would have ended up in jail for 2 years only if he committed a crime within 4 years. That wasn't applied in view of the appeal process which later cancelled the first court's conviction. Of course the whole process is taxing on the individual in question but it seems you might have misunderstood the events.

I don't think the current law is shackling anyone from operating in the industry. Requirements are basic - e.g. to train in line with ISO equivalent standards, having qualified instructors / guides depending on diver level, medical exams for instructors and prospective divers who don't qualify through the self-assessment, an insurance policy, keeping dive logs & safety equipment, servicing, etc... you can have a read at the actual law (in english) at LEĠIŻLAZZJONI MALTA .

That it could be improved - of course! I remember a few years back there was a proposal that any diver over 60 had to get a medical done which to be honest, when seeing our accidents' high level data, may not have been necessarily a bad idea!

When you say "every other country" -- cough it up - happy to receive links & have a read. We've had in the last few years much more stringent requirements imposed by the local hyperbaric chamber for diving medicals for instructors and now you need to meet the UK HSE standard to be given the yearly certificate for instructing / guiding.

Sorry but you are just saying that although it’s one of the worst systems in the world, in this regard, it’s ok because nobody could not appeal it so far?

The fact that he got not a firm jail sentence but a suspended sentence still makes him guilty? Why are you saying it’s ok? Is that normal in Malta to throw random suspended sentence until proven innocent?

How is that possible that not once but twice,
Malta tried to sentence a surviving buddy? Is the law that the buddy is guilty until proven innocent?

Do you have examples of good things that happened with this system? Or is the only the good thing that you can appeal the bad things that seem to happen because of it?

 

[David A-G]

No I am no propaganda agent - some articles on the site I run should make that quite evident as within the local community we've tried to push authorities to change quite a few things & chastising them on screw ups or where they don't keep their word.
However any major accident or death, as well as diving safety should not be just passed over as if nothing happened & say "oh ****, bad luck"! Let's not go from one extreme to the other.
Now if some look at the two incidents involving Martin & Castillo as some sort of norm here, no they are not and numbers clearly indicate that.
On medicals - the diver himself should first of all be taking care of having them on a regular basis both for his own sake, and his buddies'. Mandatory ones for guides & instructors here are partly also to protect tourists. That suggestion for over 60's was not implemented, but let's be honest, isn't it a safer way? My impression was that was being pushed for by the Hyperbaric Chamber which is publicly owned, so not due a financial interest for sure.

 

[BlueTrin]

I don’t believe that you are part of some propaganda effort. But I believe you are seeing it from the viewpoint of someone within a certain system.

I would ask myself these questions:

• Is the current law bringing tangible benefits compared to countries which do not have similar law and can I quantify that?
• Is the current law bringing negative points, unnecessary red tape and can I find examples?

You can always make it safer, but at some point you have to see if it can be quantified and if it is worth it.

“Maybe” safer or “maybe” ok does not cut it and , if not subject of a pro/con analysis, IMHO is often the source of unnecessary red tape (not particularly in scuba diving, it’s an increasingly big part of my job to make sure we meet all the red tape requirements).

This is probably why it’s hard to settle on this kind of argument on a forum.

Because you will say that the negatives aren’t so many: they were only 2 cases. And you will say that it probably brings some positives.

Some other people will argue that all the rest of the world is doing ok without these rules and that there shouldn’t be a burden on the buddy unless there are tangible elements of foul play.

 

[SlugLife]

However any major accident or death, as well as diving safety should not be just passed over as if nothing happened & say "oh ****, bad luck"! Let's not go from one extreme to the other.

There's a massive difference between:

• What can we learn from the incident, and how can we improve safety.
• Filing criminal charges against a dive-buddy, because they were unable to rescue a buddy.
• "oh **** bad luck"

To my knowledge, in all of the threads on this subject, you're the only person who has hinted at the "oh **** bad luck" perspective. That's a complete strawman. You are the only person (I remember) seeing in any of these threads, some dozens of pages long, who even suggested this extreme in any way.

If you hang around the accidents and incidents section, primarily we're looking at what we can learn. What went wrong? What might have prevented it? Just look through some of the other massive threads on this incident, and you'll find probably 100 comments specifically analyzing it from that perspective, including several of mine.

 

[L13]

No I am no propaganda agent - some articles on the site I run should make that quite evident as within the local community we've tried to push authorities to change quite a few things & chastising them on screw ups or where they don't keep their word.
However any major accident or death, as well as diving safety should not be just passed over as if nothing happened & say "oh ****, bad luck"!

Straw man. No one is saying not to investigate, and bring charges if justified by the investigation.

Peoples problem is with charging , prosecuting, sentencing, and then investigating to find the person is innocent!

Let's not go from one extreme to the other.

So you are admitting that the current situation is extremely bad?

No one is suggesting going to the other extreme, just back of from the one you are at.

Now if some look at the two incidents involving Martin & Castillo as some sort of norm here, no they are not and numbers clearly indicate that.

The way you are passing them of as "no big deal mistakes happen" suggests that you at least, see them as fairly normal. If someone from Malta, presumably knowledgeable about local diving, thinks such things are fairly normal then there is a huge problem.

On medicals - the diver himself should first of all be taking care of having them on a regular basis both for his own sake, and his buddies'. Mandatory ones for guides & instructors here are partly also to protect tourists. That suggestion for over 60's was not implemented, but let's be honest, isn't it a safer way? My impression was that was being pushed for by the Hyperbaric Chamber which is publicly owned, so not due a financial interest for sure.

Only if you also mandate medicals for bicycle riders, joggers, etc. over 60. Oh, and don't forget climbing stairs and all the other things that are riskier over 60 than under.

Since a Hyperbaric Camber can't advocate for anything, I suspect it is actually some self important individuals that runs the chamber that trying to nanny divers.

 

[David A-G]

@L13 - quite obviously you haven't even bothered reading any part of the Castillo judgements (first & appeal) and mainly rested on claims as reported by journalists, opinion writers & from social media. The crux of the matter was decided by a higher judge after evaluating "expert"'s opinions differently from the first. Now claims abound as to why the decisions were so different, whether "experts" have overstepped their remit etc. - but I leave speculation to others. Statements by participants in that case are partly reproduced there - unfortunately again, the legal system does not allow full disclosure, which could help one come to his own conclusions in an informed manner - especially those who were not there. Just the statements of witnesses in my opinion is not enough to fully understand what occurred and why, which is why in a normal investigation one also looks at data, forensics etc. The only bit of that is a small reference to the victims' autopsy results which you can read for yourself, but could have well contributed to the accident. Bottom line, my opinion, it was a tragedy from the start of dive to the end of court process.

On the Stephen Martin case, the court case never progressed as prior to conclusion of the extradition process, BSAC pressure forced the authorities to drop the case, which probably came on account on that it would be damaging for the industry. Was Castillo's case handled differently because he is a local & the victim was a serving female soldier or for other underlying reasons unconnected to diving? Some speculate that - but won't go into details.

Has it really affected the industry? Well possibly, but this summer dive centres were quite busy as usual (Probably exceeding the 130k divers of 2019), accidents still occurred but so far no more court cases... fingers crossed. Will it never happen again? I wouldn't bet on that, but the Castillo judgement indirectly implied that had he been an instructor & the victim his student, a court case would (in the Judge's eye) be brought forward in otherwise closely related circumstances. Much of the legal basis for that, as quoted in judgement, comes from English & Italian courts' case law regarding contributory negligence, as well as past other local cases which are mentioned in the same judgement.

Should you be worried if on a visit? Well, the main worry should be to prevent accidents - as we always should do. For that, the local environment is moderately easy, no tides, no major areas with currents, clear waters, mostly shore diving, quick access to hyperbaric chambers if needed, etc. May prosecutions happen in other countries in similar circumstances and/or in a different (maybe not this public) manner? Maybe yes, maybe no depending on their legal system or whether they consider divers as asking for their own death by just practising the sport. Haven't read but of a few cases as of yet (happy to receive pointers for comparison).

re: Medicals - Yes, the 60+ medical would have been over and above what is required in other sports but their rationale there was that in other sports on land, it's easier to get medical help if needed. Mind you, up to the early 2000s, a medical examination was requirement for all prospective divers and a yearly one for all practising divers, which was then abolished when the updated formal diving regulations went in. The local chamber can't impose much (except for instructors and guides) as it's a small department within a much larger health system (which with its own problems still works and hyperbaric emergency treatment is given without requiring your credit card first), but the guys approving laws are the politicians.

 

[David A-G]

There's a massive difference between:

• What can we learn from the incident, and how can we improve safety.
• Filing criminal charges against a dive-buddy, because they were unable to rescue a buddy.
• "oh **** bad luck"

To my knowledge, in all of the threads on this subject, you're the only person who has hinted at the "oh **** bad luck" perspective. That's a complete strawman. You are the only person (I remember) seeing in any of these threads, some dozens of pages long, who even suggested this extreme in any way.

If you hang around the accidents and incidents section, primarily we're looking at what we can learn. What went wrong? What might have prevented it? Just look through some of the other massive threads on this incident, and you'll find probably 100 comments specifically analyzing it from that perspective, including several of mine.

Yeps - from a diving aspect and based on what was reported in the judgements there was a lot to unpack too... no use repeating that. And yes, "Filing criminal charges against a dive-buddy, because they were unable to rescue a buddy." is a no-go.

The crux of the matter regarding the original judgement later reversed on appeal was that a hyperbaric expert made statements to the court which torpedoed that "inability to rescue", and of course, that's where practically all divers didn't agree with him. The first judge's reasoning as implied by the judgement was that Castillo should have at minimum raised the alarm earlier than it was raised. Was that justified? Castillo's statement said that when he surfaced he saw another diver on shore who he mistook for the victim from a distance. Why did the Judge not consider that? Well, it's not exactly that I am defending the court am I?

Probabilities of what went wrong and mistakes possibly done by the victim were very obvious in retrospect... and many of them, we've done ourselves with luckily no or less consequences. It's been a heavy reminder for all of us for lots of training that we received and we give and the need to put in practice. Read lots of threads elsewhere in that respect - I just joined scubaboard but was kept busy here but thanks for the pointer

 

[Wibble]

That it could be improved - of course! I remember a few years back there was a proposal that any diver over 60 had to get a medical done which to be honest, when seeing our accidents' high level data, may not have been necessarily a bad idea!

A good reason for perfectly fit people over 60 to show their appreciation to Malta by boycotting the narrow-minded island.

It's up to the individual to determine if they're fit enough without having to throw money at a "doctor" for a "medical" -- in quotes as it's utterly pointless.