Of rule, of law
Daphne’s murder was probably one of the most horrendous episodes in this country’s recent history. It shocked everyone to the core: it triggered a sense of disbelief and anger towards those cowards who plotted and subsequently executed her death.
Owen Bonnici is the Minister for Justice, Culture and Local Government er murder was an attack on the values which are at the heart of our democracy and what this country believes in. In my position as Justice Minister I cannot write much about the criminal procedures currently going on against three people accused of her killing, but I want to commend, again, the investigative authorities involved in the case – be they Maltese or foreign – who literally left no stone unturned.
The fact that Daphne was killed in the most atrocious, brutal manner put an international spotlight on her work. There is no doubt that interest in what she had written and what she had said rose to more prominence after the tragedy occurred. For many in Europe and elsewhere, she started representing the fundamental right of journalists to investigate, ask burning questions and scrutinize the workings of the powers that be.
Likewise the fact that in less than 50 days our investigative authorities, assisted by top international experts, have arraigned three people accused of this heinous murder is to be reiterated and emphasised. Again, there is the presumption of innocence which needs to be respected. But the fact that there are ongoing criminal proceedings against people accused of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder speaks volumes about the reality that Malta has left no stone unturned to bring the perpetrators to justice.
The fact that Daphne was killed in the most atrocious, brutal manner does not mean that everything she wrote became, all of a sudden, true. I can list countless of articles, based on lies, untruths and total fabrications, featured in Daphne Caruana Galizia’s blog where I or, worse still, my family, were day after day unnecessarily turned into a focus of contempt, ridicule and hatred- my mortal sin being at the end of the day that I am serving in public life with the Labour Party. I am sure that countless of other people can say the same.
As we all remember, prior to Daphne’s murder, leading authorities in our country such as Archbishop Charles J Scicluna felt the need, in various occasions and in very strong words, of reminding bloggers to be responsible in their writings. And I am sure that when he delivered those “reminders” he did not have blogs about tourist destinations in mind.
On 30 August, 2016 for instance, the Archbishop – during a homily – was reported to have said as follows:
“I warn those who use blogs and the internet to instigate the Maltese against each other, by muck-raking and insulting and humiliating each other.”
One journalist who covered the homily, Matthew Vella for Maltatoday, felt the need to describe this remark as: an obvious reference to the unofficial partisan gossip employed by Daphne Caruana Galizia and Glenn Bedingfield in their blogs, to target critics of the Nationalist and Labour parties, respectively.
Archbishop Scicluna was reported to have further said:
“Whoever carries out this instigation will have God to answer to. It is creating an environment that does not beget either unity or peace, that does not give justice. When we use the media as a means of destruction, jealousy and hatred, even this is a sin.”
Another online newspaper, The Times of Malta, had also reported that homily. It said: ‘Stop using online communication as a means to destroy people and incite hatred, the Archbishop has told bloggers.’
“I’m warning those who are using blogs, those who use the internet to incite Maltese against other Maltese, to dig up dirt, to humiliate each other and create contempt – such instigation is madness,” Mgr Charles Scicluna said in a homily last Sunday to mark the feast of St Julian’s and uploaded on the Curia website today. “Whoever persists in this manner will have to pay his dues in front of God,” he said.
At this point, The Times of Malta felt the need to include the following remark (and I quote): “Archbishop Scicluna said this amid mounting criticism that certain political bloggers were constantly crossing the line of decency.”
Our forefathers thought us of the wisdom in the words: de mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est.
For this reason I will not dwell much on this point. But within the confines of this wisdom, allow me to say for the record that I concurred with Archbishop Scicluna’s homely at the time, and I still concur with it now.
Incidentally, I came across an article the other day on www.newsbook.com.mt where the Archbishop explained that he was being subjected to ridicule and contempt by a Facebook group of Labour supporters. I read with interest the article and saw with my own eyes the language which was being used those Facebook users against the Archbishop. I unreservedly condemn that kind of language. One can agree or disagree, of course, with what the Archbishop or the Church says or does - I am for instance very critical of the clear anti-Government media bias which is present in the Church media nowadays. But that does not give you a licence to insult, ridicule and create contempt against one another.
It is not a consolation, but I am sure that the Archbishop knows that those few people who engage in fomenting contempt are not at all representative of the country at large. Most people know that politics should be about ideas, about how to make the country in which we live in a better place. About implementing change and make our society more fair and stronger.
In the past days, we have communicated a reply to Ana Gomes’ Mission report. From the feedback that I have received, at least on an informal level, it seems that there is an understanding that some of the facts contained in the Mission report might not have been precise.
On our part we are always open to engage in an open dialogue on how to keep implementing change and keep improving the rule of law.
If one takes a look at what we have done in the past five years in office, it is testament to our determination to improve the justice system and the rule of law. Only this week we have implemented an innovative piece of legislation whereby people nominated for key public appointments will need to appear in front of Parliament for scrutiny.
A Government which does not have at heart democracy and the rule of law would not implement laws such as these.
The law providing for parliamentary scrutiny is not a standalonewe have in the past years implemented a whole list of laws which have strengthened our democracy: a law regulating political parties and party financing, a whistleblowers’ act, a law striking off time barring from acts of corruption undertaken by politicians, a Constitutional amendment which entrenched the Commission for the Administration of Justice, a law which created a new Judicial Appointments Committee, a law which reformed the freedoms of expression enjoyed by artists and in a matter of a few days a whole new Media and Defamation Act. This is just to name a few.
We will keep delivering change.