I would like to bring to the attention of the authorities-that-be, an injustice which ironically would appear to emanate from the Law itself.

This matter relates to Court decrees or Court judgements that govern maintenance.

At the outset I have to protest, as a woman and as a mother, that the introduction of the Institute of Mediation has created an unjust system in that, as I have been led to believe, prior to 16 December 2003 a woman, married or otherwise, could apply for and obtain maintenance for herself and any minor children of which she had the care and custody. This is what in other judicial systems is referred to as child support.

Following the introduction of the regulations effective as of the beginning of January 2004, this is no longer possible until the mediation process is over.

Mediation as an institution has failed miserably, in that it has only served as propaganda for the authorities-that-be because the list of applications for separations publicly appears to have declined.

In reality, the number has increased; this is a way of playing with figures – as seasoned politicians are crafty enough to do.

As a working mother, I have been told that a husband or a partner can play around with a court decree in that maintenance need not be paid until after a fortnight from the date due.

Naturally this can cause immense hardship to any mother who needs to make good for daily expenses to be able to maintain the minor children in her care and custody.

This legal anomaly has to be rectified as soon as possible because a lot of unnecessary hardship is being suffered by mothers who are supposed to receive maintenance on the basis of a court order.

Again, while it is commendable that a Criminal Family Court has been set up, it is important that court decrees are enforced as ordered. For instance, if a court decree orders a husband to pay maintenance by a bank draft in view of his recurring non-payment of maintenance as decreed, then the court decree should make it explicitly clear that any expenses related to the bank draft have to be paid by the husband as it was his action (or rather his inaction) that led the court to order that maintenance was to be paid by means of a bank draft.

Some husbands regrettably and arbitrarily deduct the expenses related to the bank draft from the amount of maintenance ordered by the court.

This makes a woman feel embarrassed to have to go to court because of the deduction of Lm1.25 – an amount which, in 12 months, makes a total of Lm15.

In certain circumstances, this apparently very small amount is sufficient to maintain a child for a whole week.

Hence in reality in such a case, this implies that because of a husband’s abuse, a whole week’s maintenance will have been lost.

Criminal actions in such instances are prescribed within three months from the date due, while the husband can still pay as late as a fortnight from that date due. In such situations, I would tend to agree that the law is an ass!

My humble opinion, as a working separated single mother, is that maintenance applications should be possible at the start of separation proceedings, as the legal system was up to 16 December, 2003.

Through the Mediation Institute, our system seems to have reverted to the legal situation prior to the mid-1980s.

Are we going backwards by apparently re-introducing this system, albeit unintentionally, through the setting up of the Mediation Institute?

Michelle Catania Cordina

NAXXAR