Of musk and masks

The air in Malta and in Europe is now heavily polluted with serious allegations of how members of the Maltese government have facilitated or are themselves guilty of money laundering.

Recent revelations in the Daphne Project have once again seen the Maltese government resort to engaging in ‘discussions’ under the umbrella of Human Rights. We are not new to such tactics. Only last year, at the same time murdered journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia alleged that the Prime Minister’s wife, Michelle Muscat has a company in Panama, her husband, Joseph Muscat, raised and pushed for the introduction of gay marriage, knowing full well that the subject would shift the general public’s attention from the allegations of corruption being made.

A year on, our attention on allegations on money laundering, kickbacks and whatever else is left to be revealed about his cronies, Konrad Mizzi, Keith Schembri and Brian Tonna, are being covered up by a discussion on abortion and IVF. Mind you, these are important and relevant discussions which we should be engaging in, but it is because they are important and deserve our full attention that they should not be used as a distraction from the very serious allegations being made.

Using Human Rights as a distraction only weakens the rights in question. One cannot possibly fight for the right to have a family, or to not have a family, but then protect members of the same government and cronies who are tirelessly fighting to ensure that the right to freedom of expression and the right to protest are completely obliterated.

One cannot on the one hand claim that the current govern- ment is working on women’s rights by ensuring that women receive equal pay as their male counterpart. Or that in the near future they will be allowed to have an abortion, when six months after being blown up a few metres away from her house, Daphne Caruana Galizia, whose sterling work in fighting corruption is recognised worldwide is still being insulted and demonised. A few days ago, we also read how a young female activist was harassed online by close friends of the government and their trolls for exercising her right to protest outside a Henley and Partners event the Prime Minister was attending.

Using Human Rights as if it were a game of poker is anything but desirable, especially when these rights challenge core values that society endorses and embraces. I am not saying that these values are shared by everyone or that they are in themselves intrinsically or essentially good, but any debate on changes on how we see or interpret human life and the rights which come with it should be approached in a holistic manner. Qualified people should be taken on board and the different stakeholders should have the opportunity to be heard in a healthy environment and at healthy times. This is by no means the appropriate time, and certainly not the right atmosphere to hold such discussions because the way the debate belittles the importance of having a mature conversation on aspects of the human life. The only debate on IVF I heard of was that on Xarabank which many would agree is not