As the German mother entrusted with the care and custody of my two minor children by the Family Court in Malta, allow me to congratulate you for reporting this judgment (TMIS, 22 July).

It is important that Maltese and non-Maltese mothers living in Malta are made aware of their rights. They should feel that justice will be done by them.

I cannot however compliment you on your policy of not divulging the names of the parties. The publication of such names acts as an important and very useful deterrent to fathers and mothers who abuse their rights and the judicial system. Under the cloak of anonymity they can get away with murder. This should not be allowed and they should be publicly exposed.

The lawsuit was held in public and never behind closed doors. The judgment is available to the public on-line and the names are not withheld. There were 20 sessions held in public therefore there is no reason why the names should not be published.

I also think it is only fair that the general public who were present during the various public court sittings and obviously informed of the facts, should know the outcome when reading your report.

The writ was filed in November 2004 and has taken two-and-a-half years till this partial decision at First Instance. I understand that there is an enormous workload with which the present complement of the judiciary cannot cope to give quicker judgments.

Your reports are therefore very opportune particularly in creating awareness of this social and economic hardship (which primarily affects wives and their minor children) to the responsible government authorities.

Sometimes individuals try to avoid their obligations and there is no reason why these should not be publicly named and shamed. It may be their premeditated intention, knowing the longevity of judicial procedures and the anonymity they are assured of – (if their names are not published) – of further harassing and abusing the Maltese judicial system, their wives and children.

It is therefore felt that such perpetrators should not be given the benefit of anonymity to further their ill intentions: such benefit will encourage other wrongdoers and further sufferings.

For the information of the public and for any academic or practical use the lawsuit in question is “Andreas Wilhelm Gerdes vs Bettina Vossberg” – Writ No 375/04 NC – decided on 13 July 2007.

This case has meant many months of suffering for my children and me. On the numerous occasions I was at the Law Courts I met similar women suffering and bemoaning this situation. It is a duty for the press to make such a situation known in order to create public awareness and hopefully a better situation for those who are suffering like I did. After all this is what law reporting is all about.

Bettina Vossberg

BERLIN

GERMANY