One form of teasing is to pretend to give something that the other person desires, or doing it very slowly. This is usually done by arousing curiosity or desire and may not actually involve the intent to satisfy or disclose. This form of teasing is called “tantalising”, after the story of Tantalus.

Tantalus’ punishment by the gods, now proverbial for temptation without satisfaction (the source of the English word “tantalising”), was to stand in a pool of water beneath a fruit tree with low branches. Whenever he reached for the fruit, the branches raised his intended meal from his grasp. Whenever he bent down to get a drink, the water receded before he could get any. Over his head towered a threatening stone, like that of Sisyphus.

It is generally playful among adults, although among children it can be hurtful, such as when one child takes something that belongs to another and will not return it. It is also common in flirting and dating. For example, a man or woman who is interested in someone might rebuff an advance the first time in order to arouse interest and curiosity, and acquiesce the second or third time.

Whether the teasing is playful or hurtful is largely determined by the motive of the teaser.

A difference in power between people may also make the behaviour harmful rather than playful.

Ultimately though, if someone perceives him or herself as the victim of teasing, and experiences the teasing as unpleasant, then it is for him or her to get himself or herself out of that situation, if they can. If it comes from someone in power, then it is also a form of bullying or abuse.

This is exactly the way the Nationalist government deals with judges and the legal profession in general. Since promotion to the judiciary, and once in the judicial circle to a higher rank or indeed to Strasbourg, Luxembourg, The Hague, or another international seat, which includes the multiplication of one’s salary to the power of “n”, depends only on the whims of the government (which however well intentioned it may be remain whims nevertheless), the administration of justice in the Maltese Islands is indeed precarious.

Tantalise is what the government does. But then nobody should relate this sort of thing to the fact that we have witnessed in recent years a regression in judicial pronouncements especially where the government is involved.

Nor to the fact that the most celebrated case in living memory of judges being bribed occurred conspicuously during a period of Nationalist government bonanza, which, thanks to the Almighty, is still with us.

Apart from the fact that nowadays, the Almighty, or rather the Minister of Justice only takes into account statistical figures of how many cases a judge has got rid of, hardly anybody praises a judge for handing down a good judgment.

And when a judge annuls a law or pronounces himself against the government, all hell breaks loose. Then he may not be in line anymore for a possible lucrative appointment higher up, or overseas.

The Nationalist government would have us believe in this great blessing that has come upon us, when never before did the Maltese experience such a perfect system of justice including such an independent Maltese judiciary!

And that is not to mention how judges get paid, including perks that go with the job, such as a chauffeur-driven car, which do not derive from the consolidated fund.

No wonder then that when I once raised the plea of lack of independence of the judiciary in a court of law, it was brushed aside as something not convenient to discuss, something no one wants to talk about, a sort of thing that is considered frivolous and vexatious.

Alfred Grech

GOZO