We are making life so much more difficult and embarrassing for ourselves than we need to.

Why does Joseph Muscat's Cabinet find it so necessary to rely on a distortion of the rule of law in order to govern?  Labour has received a 40,000 electoral majority.  It is the government of choice for the growing population of Malta and Gozo and it has a mandate to rule and to govern for another five years from June 2017, having already had four years in power since 2013, albeit forced to an early election.

When making comparisons, as politicians so often do, especially when debating a new law or amendment in Parliament, one cannot help but notice that there is a fundamental difference between the previous legislations and this one and that is, that one worked and performed within the rule of law and the restrictions and accountability it ensures and the other, our current administration, works outside the rule of law, having created a labyrinth of power that shapes itself to its own unprecedented needs.

As we learnt this week, the Prime Minister does not share the view that the rule of law is absent, distorted or damaged.  He expressed his surprise at the mission of the EU delegation coming to Malta to investigate this subject. 

But there are many different households in a country.  Not all run on the same paradigm.  Preferences vary according to income, education, style, ambition, moral values and social habits.  A government cannot afford itself the same freedom of choice.  A government must answer to the people of both the majority and the minority.  It is a government for all the country with a mandate to carry out the programme that it was elected upon, with the approval of Parliament and is equal at law.  As such, there are Institutions, Courts of Law, a Police force and an Army to protect people, and a Civil Service to run services properly.  When this paradigm is altered to subjective needs and moves away from one defined constitution we become set adrift at sea, open to the storm and high seas.

It is at this point, when the ship is seen to be sliding outside its territorial waters out to some zone where pirates may lurk and all is unchartered, that controls and checks must be applied.  The European Union Commission, for all its cumbersome bureaucracy, has a mission to ensure the safety and security of its members, by correcting course for those who lose it.

To Joseph Muscat, the water around him seems fine. He likes the temperature, a dolphin here and there jumping merrily into the blue sea and swimming alongside the ship, a skipper who goes wherever you tell him to without question and whatever happens below the decks is nobody's concern.

But, to others, this course cannot be maintained or it becomes a pirate ship itself.  Going out to unchartered waters is dangerous and raises suspicion.  Why, after all, would it be necessary to ignore the rules and have the coast guard come out to see what you have on board?

There is a sense of something illegal afoot.  Normal governments use the tools they are given and strive to create a life for their citizens by respecting the rule of law and ensuring justice is there for all and can be seen to be done.  That is where the comparisons are to be made - on a level playing field, not on one created to work for the few according to a new paradigm, which has not been approved or casts suspicions of delinquency.

If not corrupt, then, at the very least, such a government may be said to be a delinquent government.  Like a child, it requires someone to monitor it, chase after it, keep it from harm.  Delinquency is appealing to some people, to certain youths one might say or to those who never made it from boys to men.  But to the general population, there is concern and even anger, protest and action to bring such a government to order. 

There is disorder, confusion, lack of respect, arrogance and distortion. So, when the inspectors come calling, there is surprise and lack of cooperation.  There is simply a superficial reaction and conformity.  It also requires for the leader to then become the main focus and other officials and Ministers to move to the background.  One might say that we then have an autocracy.  A system of Government by one person with absolute power.

How do we approach this state of affairs?  There is insubordination, there is insularity and regression within it.  Whilst modern states in a democratic union, such as the European Union, are open and maturing into more conscious societies, we in Malta have rolled back the years when it comes to the common good.  It is like a niche government, one that has special interests only.  Preservation of historical identity, values and standard of living are discarded and replaced by narrow interests which cannot be challenged as there is no more means and methods to do so. 

If Muscat cannot grasp this fundamental factor, it is no wonder he remains amazed by what is taking place around him.  He is now an outsider in his own country.  He must therefore, be judge and jury, leader and maker of rules. 

So, we will continue to see him relegate the Commissioner of Police to the presentation of certificates and to appear with any motley ensemble of Ministers or his Chief of Staff alongside, as he goes from one end of the rope to the other. 

In the meantime, the Committees and EU MEPs are themselves amazed at what has been happening right in their own back yard and which they apparently have been largely ignoring or unaware of.  Just because you are member of the European Union does not mean that you cannot elect a populist or undemocratic party.  If most judgements of adequacy are made on economic performance, then it is not extraordinary that Malta has been held in high esteem for such a long time.  Take that aside however, look between the lines and you see that not only have the fundamentals changed but also the very essence of what the economy and the system is now built on. 

Is it possible for such systems to be put back in order?  Is the will there to do so?  If the only raison d'etre is the result at the ballot box, the only legitimacy the one given to it by the voters, then nothing can cause such an autocracy to change course.  But, if it is the case that the country is actually trading in its status as a member of the EU and using its name and borrowing its fortune to build a sole empire, then the cards will come tumbling down, should the EU choose to remove even one of those cards.  We need only look at Brexit to see that maintaining two opposing positions is not possible.  Going it alone, again, is costly and would probably bring such a government down.

The choice is becoming clearer.  Autocracy or EU membership and democracy and the rule of law.  The time for playing pirates is over.  The treasure is sunk somewhere already, anyway.  All it will need is a map to get to it later.  Hopefully that map is still in one piece because who knows what would happen otherwise?