It was a democratic decision, by all means, but it does not necessarily mean that it was correct.

The General Workers’ Union council last Monday decided that the contenders for the top union posts should not give interviews or speak to the press. They are to observe a total media blackout except for contributions to the union’s own newspapers, l-orizzont and it-Torca.

This happened after union officials had already accepted to give interviews before the GWU congress convenes next week to elect its leaders for the coming four years. The Malta Independent had already lined up interviews with Tony Zarb and Emmanuel Micallef, who are both contesting the post of secretary-general.

Separate interviews had been planned for Tuesday morning, but an hour before the first appointment, TMID was informed they had been cancelled following the council’s decision the day before. It is also known that Bondiplus was planning to have the two contenders take part in a debate a day before the congress began. Their participation has also been ruled out now.

The vote taken on Monday was overwhelmingly in favour of the media blackout, with only three abstentions and two votes against from a total of 56 council members. Mr Micallef was one of two members who voted against the blackout; however he said he will be respecting the council’s decision.

Was the council’s decision to order a media blackout the right move? What does the union think it will achieve by imposing a media blackout? Who proposed the media blackout, and why? Why doesn’t the union want to speak to journalists other than its own?

What is happening today is quite unique in the GWU’s history. For the first time since it was set up 62 years ago, the post of secretary-general, the top position within the union, is being contested. In the past, there used to be only one candidate who had the support of most of the delegates and was automatically elected. This time we have a different situation.

Union officials say this is proof that democracy reigns in the union – there are no doubts about that. But it is also a sign that there is some form of division within the union; that there are two forces pulling in opposite directions; that there are people pushing for a change while others want to keep the status quo.

It is therefore rather disappointing and inopportune that the union has closed its doors to the media other than its own. It would have been interesting to see what the main contenders, especially Mr Zarb and Mr Micallef, have to say, what their views are on different issues, where they intend to take the union in future, what Mr Zarb and Mr Micallef think of each other, how they intend to convince delegates to vote for them and a hundred other questions that, alas, will now remain unanswered. Delegates would have had more to digest and ponder upon before casting their preference on Wednesday.

Now, they – and the rest of us – will only read what they want to say in the union’s media ... it is not possible to ask them questions that are important and directly related to the post they are contesting. Writing an article is one thing, being questioned by journalists who do not form part of the media you own, is another.

The media blackout will ultimately work against the union because it will be perceived as not being strong enough to face the press – other than its own – at a time when the GWU will be taking an extremely important decision.