Last Wednesday morning, I was walking along the Sliema promenade. Suddenly a tall well-built man who must have been in his 60s and who was wearing headphones passed near me and shouted ‘bżieq’ (spit) to me. He kept on walking.
I walked towards the man and asked him to repeat, but his music must have been loud. I then went closer to him and again asked him to repeat. A warden was close by, as was another man.
The man in the headphones, in an aggressive tone, said that he hadn’t spoken to me but then called me ‘demel’ (dung) and resorted to threats, saying that even though he is older than me, he would beat me up. The warden seemed to be as shocked as I was and winked to me as if to calm me down and let things be. The other man nearby acted similarly.
I was shocked and walked home in shivers. This may sound strange, as I have a thick skin. When my dad questioned Dom Mintoff’s excesses in the late 1970s, only to be expelled by Labour, our family had police protection. I don’t remember this as I was born in 1975. But I do remember what went on in the 1980s. I remember my dad coming home reporting mob rule and violence. I do remember travelling in our Mini during the eerie lonely nights preceding the 1987 general election.
I do remember Labourite mobs insulting my dad during his Partit Demokratiku public meetings. The same Partit Demokratiku which also involved Michael Vella, the father of slain journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.
When I was a kid I too experienced my fair share of politically-incited violence. I remember a female school beadle insulting me because of my dad. Once I was beaten up by someone my age because I did not fit in politically.
Which takes me back to the incident on the Sliema promenade. I never saw this man in the headphones before last Wednesday, and if I were cool and coldly rational I would have taken a photo of him or asked the warden to phone the police. But I was shocked.
Shocked not by the insults. I receive a lot of positive and negative comments about my activism. So do other activists and politicians.
What shocked me was the sense of entitlement that the man in the headphones expressed. He felt perfectly safe to insult and threaten me in a public space, in the presence of a warden.
Some others who are resorting to violent language in the social media seem to be quite comfortable doing it.
Ask Tony Zarb, who retained his post as government consultant after verbally abusing the Occupy Justice activists.
Verbal abuse of political adversaries is becoming increasingly common.
This is not about freedom of speech, as suggested by an ex-police commissioner in court in a case involving threats towards MEP Roberta Metsola. This is about intimidation.
Which takes me to an eye-opening article about ideology penned by philosopher Louis Althusser in post-1968 France.
Althusser suggested that life is full of rituals which we take for granted and which make us subjected to prevalent ideologies. Such as greeting someone or speaking a language which others understand.
But ideologies can also represent power: Such as when a police officer shouts “Hey, you there!” and an individual turns around and ‘answers’ the call. The individual here is subjected to the ideology of law and order.
Malta is moving towards an ideology of mob rule, where some feel entitled to intimidate and attack others because of their beliefs. Daphne Caruana Galizia paid the ultimate price for her journalism.
We better act fast before the ideology of mob rule becomes the new normal and things get worse.
Il-qtil brutali ta’ Daphne Caruana
Galizia u l-protesti sussegwenti organizzati min-Netwerk tas-Socjeta’ Civili,
mill-Occupy Justice u mill-Kenniesa tal-Kabinett waslu biex jigi accelerat
il-process tar-riforma kostituzzjonali f’Malta. L-oppozizzjoni Nazzjonalista
kellha u ghandha rwol ewlieni f’dan il-process permezz tal-pozizzjonijiet
parlamentari li qed tiehu.
Nittama li r-riforma kostituzzjonali ma
tintuzax bhala paraventu mill-gvern biex jipprova jnessina minn kwistjonijiet
urgenti bhall-kolass ta’ istituzzjonijiet bhall-Kummissarju tal-Pulizija u
Nittama wkoll li r-riforma
kostituzzjonali tiffoka li jigu msahha ic-‘checks and balances’ bejn it-tliet
organi ta’ l-istat: il-legislattiv, l-ezekuttiv u l-gudikatura.
L-ikbar sfida f’dan ir-rigward hi s-sistema
politika fejn il-partit fil-gvern ghandu l-opportunita’ li jahtaf kollox taht
idejh, u li awtoritajiet li suppost huma indipendenti jispiccaw immexxija minn
nies servili ghall-Ministri.
Kull partit fil-gvern inqabad f’din
in-nassa b’xi mod jew iehor, izda kien hemm gvernijiet fejn dan kollu sar b’mod
ezagerat. Nistghu insemmu l-Gvernijiet Laburisti ta’ qabel l-1987, u l-Gvern
Laburista prezenti bhala l-iktar ezempji cari. Il-Gvern prezenti ta’ Joseph
Muscat sahansitra huwa ibbazat fuq stil ta tmexxija fejn dawk ta’ fuq igawdu
impunita’ ghall-korruzzjoni u decizzjonijiet xejn trasparenti. Il-korruzzjoni
m’ghadiex l-eccezzjoni: saret prerekwizit tal-Gvern.
Kif qal tajjeb Giovanni Bonello,
fit-Times of Malta fis-7 ta’ Novembru li ghadda,
“A country cannot claim to follow the rule of
law when all the prosecuting authorities are controlled and muzzled, when
the judiciary is packed with party inepts, when the police force employs convicted
criminals, when impunity is guaranteed for anyone on the right side of the
political fence, when court-certified felons are promoted, when prosecutions
are sabotaged and when those who try to follow up political corruption are
battered, when the voice of protest is silenced in a blast of Mafia.”
Ghalhekk nappella sabiex ir-riforma kostituzzjonali tkun verament
genwina u li persuni ta’ rieda tajba fil-Gvern ta’ Muscat ma jippermettux li
anke din tigi korrotta.
Ghandu jkun hemm enfasi fuq djalogu u sens civiku. Il-process ghandu
jinvolvi lis-socjeta’ civili, il-partiti politici, akkademici u esperti
kostituzzjonali, kif ukoll vucijiet ohra varji fis-socjeta’ Maltija.
Fuq kollox, dawk li jmexxu ir-riforma kostituzzjonali ghandhom ikunu
nies ta’ integrita’, onesta u li jgawdu fiducja wiesgha fis-socjeta’ Maltija.
Il-process ghandu jkun suggett ghal skrutinju demokratiku. Per ezempju, jista’ jkun
approvat permezz ta’ maggoranza ta’ zewg terzi tal-parlament u referendum
L-oppozizzjoni parlamentari u ekstra-parlamentari, is-socjeta’ civili u
l-media ghandhom ikunu ghassa li l-Gvern ma juzax ir-riforma ghal skopijiet
partiggjani. Nistennew u naraw. U jekk inkunu konvinti, nippartecipaw.
1. Civil Society Network - Malta, Occupy Justice Malta, Kenniesa Kabinett etc mobilized people despite the naysayers' advice to the contrary, the refusal of various opinionists to speak in events and the below-the-belt organized attacks. This helped raise the issue at EP level and Malta is now discussing constitutional reform (though I mistrust the process). But civil society and the media have their limits.
2. The unifying task of good governance activists is to ensure that good governance is on the political agenda.
3. If others want other initiatives on good governance, they should just go ahead and do it.
4. Not calling a spade a spade works in Government's hands, and this is not a normal government. Perky relativism may not get you adversaries, but it might also get you nowhere.
“The European Union is like a window. You miss it once it is not there.” This statement by Anthony Gardner electrified the audience at the plenary session of the European public communication conference organised by the Committee of the Regions in Brussels some days ago.
Gardner was US ambassador to the EU in the final three years of Obama’s presidency. Now he is free to speak as a private citizen. In this conference, he spoke about the importance of the EU in a world of turbulence, but emphasised that the bloc fairs poorly in communication about its achievements.
For example, he said that when passion meets facts, passion nearly always wins. We have seen so many examples of this in the recent past including the rise of populism in different countries.
Gardner said that the EU needs to counter this by using passion to support arguments. As he put it, we need visions that can inspire, as facts are not enough. Indeed, very often the way how an argument is presented is more important than the argument itself.
Ask electors in the US and Britain following the victories of Trump and Brexit. The logic and factual arguments behind these forces may have been poor, but they were more persuasive to their constituents.
Transposed to the EU, Gardner said that its communications strategy characterised by brochures nobody reads, boring information and dull speakers needs a revamp. For example, how many young Europeans know about the EU’s solidarity corps, which attracted 40,000 youth? Could more have been attracted if the initiative were more present in everyday life and the social media?
Hence, in an age of snackable social media and digital savvy citizens, the EU should focus more on engaging with citizens through user-friendly methods. It should be able to narrate stories, show powerful images, to show how important it is as a window, “hardly visible: just when dirty or cracked. It should be a window that lets in light and keeps out the cold”.
Another speaker, Jaume Duch Guillot from the European Parliament, said that the EU’s communication should be objective, factual, and trustful. But it should also embrace emotion, to define messages according to the target audiences, to be strategic and consistent. Clarity of language was also emphasised by Estonian Minister Matti Massikas.
Other speakers stressed the importance of looking at the EU as being made up of each and every one of us citizens who make up the bloc. Karl-Heinz Lambertz, President of the European Committee of the Regions, said that Europe is not just Brussels: it is our cities, regions, towns and villages. If we want a better Europe, we need to take ownership of the European project, by deliberating, participating in politics, civil society and the public sphere.
And this takes me to the current nightmare that Malta is experiencing: the nightmare of bad governance, institutional breakdown, corruption and impunity. A post-Daphne Malta, where even the murder of a journalist is being subjected to apologetic and dishonest strategies by government forces and their allies.
Within this context, it is only natural to expect Maltese social and political forces to discuss the issue at a European level. Not that we have much choice: I have never seen so much interest in Malta by journalists from all aroundthe continent.
Thus, it is not them “Europeans” in the European Parliament who are trying to clean Malta from corruption. It is not some dark conspiracy which is troubled by Malta’s breakdown of rule of law. It is we Europeans who are working on this.
The Maltese who are standing up to be counted are part of this effort, as are the Euro Parliamentarians from different political groups.
Seen from this perspective, the post-Daphne scenario in Malta requires passion and a vision for a country crying for good governance. Loving Malta and loving Europe become one and the same thing.
Skond il-Prim Ministru Joseph Muscat, dan hu gvern li jisma’. Dan hu gvern li qed itina l-aqwa zmien, u huwa gvern taghna lkoll.
Fl-ahhar elezzjoni generali il-maggoranza tal-poplu Malti eleggiet lill-Partit Laburista u ghalhekk, Joseph Muscat qed jghid li ghandu l-mandat ikompli bil-programm tieghu.
S’hawnhekk forsi kollox sew. Izda d-demokrazjia ma tibdiex u tispicca biss bl-elezzjonijiet generali. Hemm differenza bejn demokraziji liberali u dawk illiberali. F’dawk ta’ l-ewwel, il-poter huwa dicentralizzat, u f’dawk ta’ l-ahhar huwa centralizzat. F’dawk ta’ l-ewwel, tezisti s-saltna tad-dritt, u f’dawk ta’ l-ahhar, l-oligarkija ghandha sahha fuq kollox u kulhadd. F’dawk ta’ l-ewwel hemm ‘checks and balances’ bhall-istituzzjonijiet awtonomi mill-gvern, u f’dawk ta’ l-ahhar l-istituzzjonijiet jipprotegu l-gvern qabel lic-cittadin.
L-Ingilterra, Franza, il-Germanja u l-Istati Uniti huma ezempji ta’ demokraziji liberali, filwaqt li r-Russja, it-Turkija, Singapore u l-Venezuela huma ezempji ta’ demokraziki illiberali. F’dawn ta’ l-ahhar, kritici tal-Gvern jistghu jistennew trattament hazin, u kemm il-darba naqraw x’jigri lill-gurnalisti, attivisti tas-socjeta’ civili u politici ta’ l-oppozizzjoni f’dawn il-pajjizi.
Minn naha l-ohra, it-tlett karateristici bacizi ta’ demokrazija liberali huma regolati bil-kostituzzjoni u l-ebda maggoranza elettorali m’ghandha d-dritt li tfarrakom. Inkella tkun maggoranza bhal ta’ Erdogan fit-Turkija, li qed isir iktar awtoritarju bil-gurnata.
Allura Malta x’tip ta’ demokrazija hi? Il-fatt li pajjizna huwa membru ta’ l-Unjoni Ewropea jfisser li qed nghixu f’demokrazija liberali. Hemm aspetti tal-governanza fejn pajjizna miexi l-quddiem, bhal nghidu ahna d-drittijiet ta’ minoranzi. Izda hemm aspetti ohrajn fejn sejrin lura bhal granc, u l-vot massiv tal-Parlament Ewropew dwar Malta ftit tal-granet ilu u xhieda ta’ dan.
Jien kburi li l-Unjoni Ewropea taghna qed tiehu azzjoni dwar Malta taghna, favur is-saltna tad-dritt u l-governanza tajba, u kontra l-korruzzjoni u l-krizi ta’ l-istituzzjonijiet. Tajjeb nimmaginaw x’kien jigri minn pajjizna kieku ma dhalniex fl-Unjoni Ewropea. Forsi Joseph Muscat kien jithajjar imur pass oltre minn dak li hu ghaddej issa. Ma kien ikun hemm l-ebda Parlament Ewropew li jigbidlu widnejh. U l-oligarkija kien ikollha iktar liberta’ taghmel li trid.
Ghalhekk, galadarba Joseph Muscat qed isostni li l-Gvern tieghu hu wiehed li jisma’, in-Netwerk tas-Soċjetà Ċivili ħabbret inizjattiva f’dan ir-rigward.
Il-pubbliku qed ikun mistieden jagħmel mistoqsijiet lill-Prim Ministru dwar il-governanza u s-saltna tad-dritt. Dan jista’ jsir permezz ta’ formola online li tinstab fuq il-pagni tal-Facebook u tat-Twitter tan-Netwerk.
In-Netwerk ser jaġixxi ta' punt ta' kuntatt pubbliku sabiex dawk li jagħmlu mistoqsijiet ma jkollhomx għalfejn juru l-identità tagħhom. Imbagħad il-mistoqsijiet isiru pubblikament lil Joseph Muscat.
Peress li l-Prim Ministru bblokkja lin-Netwerk tas-Soċjetà Ċivili mill-profile tiegħu ta' Twitter, ser nużaw mezzi oħrajn biex nagħmlulu mistoqsijiet.
Sadanittant, għadda iktar minn xahar mill-qtil brutali ta' Daphne Caruana Galizia, u għad m'hemm l-ebda sinjal ta' ġustizzja. L-arloġġ tal-ġustizzja tan-Netwerk għadu għaddej, u dan jinstab fuq http://www.csnmalta.com/
Prim Ministru Joseph Muscat, forsi dan hu l-aqwa zmien ghall-partit tieghek u ghal dawk li qed igawdu mill-istil tal-governanza tieghek. Izda jekk verament tirrispetta n-normi bazici ta’ demokrazija liberali, tajjeb li twiegeb il-mistoqsijiet genwini li jsiru mill-pubbliku. U tajjeb li r-risposti jkunu genwini.
In 1983, sociologist Diana Meehan analysed images of women on television. She suggested that representations on TV cast ‘good’ women as submissive, sensitive and domesticated while ‘bad’ women are rebellious, independent and selfish.
Through her analysis, Meehan identified common stereotypes of women as depicted on TV. These included ‘the harpy’, who is aggressive and single; and ‘the bitch’, who is a sneak, a cheat and manipulative, and ‘the witch’, who has extra power but is subordinated to men. Other stereotypes include the ‘good wife’, the ‘victim’, the ‘courtesan’ and the ‘matriarch’. Three decades later we still encounter such stereotypes in various forms of communication.
Which takes me to an article penned by Daphne Caruana Galizia in The Malta Independent (September 10). She wrote that the other side of the coin of advances in gay rights is the reality of what she saw as the real victims in Maltese society, straight women: the ones who are ‘bullied, harassed, ill-treated, patronised, pimped out or beaten up by straight men’. Little did Caruana Galizia know that she would herself be a victim, this time of a most cowardly act of bombing which robbed her life.
Caruana Galizia, who was often labelled as the ‘witch from Bidnija’ also frequently wrote about certain politicians who parade their wives as if they were some form of voiceless yet fashionable trophy.
Luckily, some female activists are deconstructing this narrative through brave initiatives such as Occupy Justice, which, incidentally was itself bullied by the caveman discourse of the likes of Tony Zarb.
True, Malta has advanced in certain policy initiatives related to gender equality. But let us not kid ourselves: we remain a European laggard in this field.
In this regard, a recent initiative organised at the University of Malta was almost prophetic in its choice of subject. ‘Women’, was organised by the Humanities, Medicine and Science (HUMS) programme, and it left much food for thought and action.
The seminar’s chair Clare Vassallo dedicated it Caruana Galizia, who had just been murdered a few days before. Indeed, the event was characterised by an eerie feel due to this macabre happening, but I could also sense a feeling of resolve among those present: a resolve to combat prejudice against women.
As Vassallo put it, Caruana Galizia started a whole new type of investigative journalism in Malta, and despite the insults, she remained fearless until the very end.
Vassallo also spoke of Virginia Woolf, who once observed that despite the richness of literature written by women, this was often obscured in patriarchal societies, where men wrote about women and where brave authors like Woolf herself had to overcome various hurdles to make it to the public sphere.
Another speaker, Edwina Portanier Brejza illuminated the audience with a host of examples of female inventors in the world of science, while Christine Galea discussed the Catholic narrative of equality of complimentary roles, something which perhaps deserves more debate in a world of increased diversity and fluidity.
Other speakers included Anthony Frendo, Charlene Vella and Charles Savona Ventura, the latter discussing what he calls the ‘five shades of purple’ in gender.
Of particular interest was the talk by Maria Theuma from the Department of English. She discussed the ‘cyborg’ theory of celebrated sociologist Donna Haraway. The latter had once proposed that our bodies are increasingly immersed with technologies in fields such as medicine and communication. While this can lead to dystopian futures in terms of ethical considerations, it can also serve as a source of liberation and self-creation.
And this self-creation can be applied in the fields of politics and activism. Caruana Galizia’s creative use of the blog was a case in point. Her articles were uploaded at all times of the day, and the whole country was hooked.
What made things even more interesting was that her blogs were shared in the social media and included tonnes of feedback. Many seemed to trust her more than the authorities when they provided her with information about corruption, bad governance and abuse of power. Everyone could become a co-author with Caruana Galizia, who articulated the information with her powerful pen.
It is now our duty, women and men, to ensure that Caruana Galizia’s writings live.
tal-granet ilu fettili nippostja xi ahbarijiet dwar censura minn media lokali
fis-sit pubbliku fuq il-facebook tal-Front Kontra c-Censura.
wara irrealizzajt li gejt ibbanjat minn dan il-grupp. Iva, ibbanjat.
Iccensurat. M’ghadx ghandi access ghal dan is-sit pubbliku ghax l-amministratur
Mark Camilleri ghogbu jibbanjani minnu, kif stqarr huwa stess fuq il-facebook.
din! Jigifieri jekk xi hadd jippostja ahbarijiet dwar censura li ma jdoqqux ghal
widnejn Camilleri, dan jigi ccensurat. L-attivist kontra c-censura sar
jiccensura huwa stess. Qisu meta jkollok revoluzzjonarju li jsir tirann. Sewwa
qal Albert Camus fil-ktieb ‘ir-Ribell’ meta wissa kontra l-assolutizmu.
min jghid x’kien fihom il-posts tieghi. Wahda kienet dwar allegat theddid fuq
muzicisti li kienu ser idoqqu f’kuncert ghal Daphne Caruana Galizia. Din
l-ahbar deheret fuq Lovin Malta. Jien stess nista’ nikkonferma li hemm
muzicisti jibzghu minn vendikazzjonijiet: Meta ftit granet wara n-netwerk
tas-socjeta’ civili organizzat sit-in simboliku quddiem id-depot tal-Pulizija,
stedinna numru ta’ bands. Kien hemm min accetta. Izda kien hemm ukoll min xtaq
idoqq izda kellu jirrifjuta minhabba li
bezghu minn dak li jista’ jigrilhom galadabra jahdmu fic-civil.
Post ohra tieghi kienet ahbar li deher
fuq is-sit newsbook. Hawnhekk, gie zvelat li Jonathan Ferris akkuza lill-Avukat Ġenerali
peress li dan ta’ l-ahhar irid li l-każ ta’ Ferris jinstema' bil-magħluq.
Ferris stqarr li dan imur kontra d-drittijiet tiegħu li għandu jkun protett
b’mod xieraq mill-istat. Ta’ min niftakru li Ferris tkecca mill-FIAU talli dan
ghamel xogholu fil-konfront investigazzjoni ta’ kriminalita’ ekonomika.
gejna qeghdin sew. Il-Front Kontra c-Censura saret ticcensura hi stess. Ma nahsibx
li din hi kumbinazzjoni. Mark Camilleri kien canvasser ta’ Owen Bonnici qabel
l-elezzjoni tal-2013, u wara r-rebha Laburista giet mahtur chairman exekuttiv
tal-Kunsill Nazzjonali tal-Ktieb. Qed jithallas eluf kbar ta’ Ewro mit-taxxi
taghna f’dik li tista’ tissejjah hatra ‘taghna lkoll’.
l-elezzjoni tal-2017, il-Malta Independent (29 ta’ Mejju) irraportat li istess
Mark Camilleri rega’ appoggja pubblikament lill-Partit Laburista u qal li ser
jaghti l-ewwel preferenza lill-Helena
Dalli tal-PL u t-tieni preferenza lill-Alternattiva Demokratika. Qal ukoll li
Simon Busuttil huwa ‘iktar korrott b’mod ovju’ minn Keith Schembri u Konrad
Mark Camilleri ghandu kull dritt ghall-opinjoni tieghu, u nippreferi li persuna
jghid x’inhi l-affiljazzjoni politika tieghu milli jinheba wara diskors oskur
nemmen li l-pozizzjoni ta’ Camilleri fil-Front Kontra c-Censura m’hijiex
tenibbli ghas-semplici fatt li ghazel li jiccensura posts u kontributur sempliciment
ghax ma jaqbilx mieghu. Liberta’ ta’ l-espressjoni? Ahjar nidhaq.
When Joseph Muscat’s government introduced the controversial cash-for-passports scheme in 2013, it attempted to pacify criticism by promising that the scheme would be temporary. It is now clear that the scheme is the main reason why the government is registering a budgetary surplus. Malta is now dependent on the selling of passports and there are no signs that the government will stop the sellout. Joseph Muscat’s recent passport-selling trip to Dubai, a few days after the brutal murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, is very indicative of his priorities.
This is surely not something to boast about, especially when one considers Malta’s declining reputation due to tax avoidance schemes, money laundering, Panama Papers, corruption and institutional breakdown.
Indeed, the surplus of bad governance is overshadowing Malta’s financial surplus. The mechanisms of the passports scheme itself are very telling in this regard.
The government’s financial figures for the first eight months of 2017 included a €33.6 million increase from ‘Fees of Office’, which mainly refer to Malta’s sale of passports. In 2016, Malta registered a surplus of €112.9 million, and income from the sale of passports amounted to €163.5 million.
Seventy per cent of the funds generation from the sale of passports are deposited in the so-called National Development and Social Fund (NDSF), which was set up in July 2016, and prior to that such funds were temporarily recorded in a treasury fund. According to the government, the fund now has €309 million.
This is just about all the financial information which citizens of Malta are being given on our country’s sale of passports. The government also publishes information regarding those who are granted Maltese (and EU) citizenship, but this is cheekily muddled up in a list which also includes persons who were granted citizenship through naturalization. This year government went a step further and has so far failed to publish the list of persons granted citizenship.
I think that the government is having it too good on this matter, and here I am not only referring to the treatment of this matter by the Opposition, civil society and the local media. I am also referring to the negligence of the European Commission. I wonder what Jean-Claude Juncker has to say about Malta’s governance today, especially since the nightmare of bad governance and dubious deals has entered darker territory with the murder of Caruana Galizia.
Last year I wrote another article about the passports scheme in this newspaper, and to date various questions which I asked remain unanswered.
Specifically, what is being done with the revenue deposited in the fund referred to above? How is it being spent? Who decides on the allocation and utilization of funds? What are the timelines? Is there a business plan? Which specific areas are covered by the fund?
Following Labour’s massive exploitation of the power of incumbency in the run-up to last June’s general election, I can add other questions. Are such funds used for both capital and recurrent expenditure? How much was spent during the electoral campaign? Has expenditure increased following the election? When will itemised expenditure be published?
Let us keep in mind that the National Development and Social Fund is not part of the highly regulated EU funding framework. Thus it benefits from more flexible decisions and greater ministerial intervention. Spot on for incumbency.
Malta’s sale of passports is yet another example of the soulless state we are experiencing. It is soulless as short-term financial considerations are running roughshod over other concerns such as security, ethics, sustainability and transparency.
This is the same soulless State that is built on an infrastructure of buying votes through favours, resulting in increased dependency on ministers at the expense of true citizen empowerment. The soulless State is built on micro-power that spreads through the capillaries of society, where the government presence is all over the place. The sale of citizenship provides a financial base to this mechanism, resulting in an increased addiction to the malaise.
Il-Prim Ministru ta’ Malta Joseph Muscat ghandu habta jghid li min ma jaqbilx mieghu huwa negattiv.
Hekk jaghmel meta l-media li m’hijiex ikkontrollata mil-Partit Laburista tirraporta dwar kazijet cari ta’ koruzzjoni u governanza hazina.
Hekk jaghmel meta’ ghaqdiet mhux governattivi iqajmu kwistjonijiet relatati mal-faqar, l-ambjent u l-prekarjat.
Hekk jaghmel meta s-socjeta’ civili tinghaqqad u titkellem b’mod car dwar il-qtil ta’ Daphne Caruana Galizia, dwar il-Panama Papers, dwar il-krizi ta’ l-istituzzjonijiet.
U hekk jaghmel meta deputati parlamentari ta’ l-oppozizzjoni jezercitaw id-dritt u d-dmir taghhom li jiskrutinaw l-operat tal-Gvern.
Izda kif kien spjega tajjeb Mark A. Sammut fil-ktieb L-Aqwa fl-Ewropa. Il-Panama Papers u l-Poter (2016), Joseph Muscat ta’ spiss juza tattika biex jizgwidana minn dak li jkun verament ghaddej. Jurina z’qed taghmel l-id il-leminija izda jahbi l-id ix-xellugija.
Joseph Muscat juza l-lingwagg ta’ ‘tkunx negattiv’ biex jitfa l-attenzjoni fuq l-avversarju politiku minflok fuqu nnifsu bhala kap tal-Gvern.
Il-Prim Ministru gieli jipprova jizgwidana iktar billi jipproponi mizuri godda fl-eqqel ta’ krizi politika. Mhux ta’ b’xejn li l-Gvern jiffoka fuq press conferences dwar materji li ma jkollhom x’jaqsmu xejn mal-krizi istituzzjonali.
Fl-eqqel tal-Panama Papers u fl-eqqel ta’ l-inkubu relatat mal-qtil ta’ Daphne Caruana Galizia, il-Gvern ta’ Muscat tarah jipproponi u jintroduci mizuri relatati mal-pensjonijiet, id-dizabilita’, il-liberatijiet civili u elf haga ohra.
F’dan il-kuntest jehtieg li ma nhallux lill-Prim Ministru juza r-riforma kostituzzjonali biex jizgwidana.
Halli nkun car : Pajjizna jehtieg riforma kostituzzjonali. Jehtieg li l-hatriet importanti ikollhom kunsens u fiducja wiesgha. Jehtieg li pajjizna ikollu gvern izghar u socjeta’ ikbar. Jehtieg li pajjizna ikollu iktar poteri dicentralizzati u inqas Ministri li jahtfu hafna poteri taht idejhom.
Izda jehtieg ukoll li Joseph Muscat jiehu decizzjonijet urgenti sabiex pajjizna jaffronta l-inkubu relatat mal-qtil ta’ Daphne Caruana Galizia u ma kwistjonijiet bhall-Panama Papers.
Qabel mal-Prim Ministru inehhi l-Avukat Generali u l-Kummissarju tal-Pulizija, difficli jkun hawn fiducja f’dawn l-istituzzjonijiet rispettivi. U jehtieg ukoll li l-Prim Ministru jaqbel ma’ l-oppozizzjoni u s-socjeta’ civili u jizgura li jkun hemm kunsens wiesgha ghall-hatra ta’ avukat generali u kummissarji tal-pulizija godda. Dan jista’ jsir b’approvazzjoni ta’ zewg terzi tal-Parlament.
Joseph Muscat ghandu opportunita’ li ma jibqax ikun negattiv dwar riforma urgenti f’dawn l-istituzzjonijiet. X’qed iwaqqfu milli jaghmel dan ?