I have nothing but praise for minister Joe Cassar and parliamentary secretary Mario de Marco for their courageous “yes” vote at the end of the second reading of the divorce bill last Wednesday. Given their places in the Cabinet, their decision to respect the will of the majority carries so much relevance.

While Dr de Marco has always shown an inclination to favour the introduction of divorce legislation,and as such has remained consistent with his original views in spite of keeping his cards very close to his chest, for Dr Cassar it must have been a tough internal battle. A few weeks before the referendum took place, I had the opportunity to have a long conversation with him on the subject – and we finally agreed to disagree, as I was adamantly in favour and he was adamantly against. Still, when crunch time arrived, he put his conscience aside and chose to give weight to what the people think. That he was the only minister to acknowledge that the people’s will should reign supreme gives his vote a stronger meaning.

My respect for these two gentlemen has gone up many notches since Wednesday. Voting against the wishes of their party from the front bench was a choice that could have its consequences, considering the level of intolerance that we have seen from Nationalist quarters against those who backed divorce. But they have earned kudos with level-headed people for whom human concerns, and the solution to people’s difficulties, come before party and personal interests.

The more time that passes in this term, the more the Nationalist Party plummets to deeper lows, and it is only through people like Dr Cassar and Dr de Marco that it could build its revival.

Similarly, Nationalist MPs who hold important positions, such as deputy speaker Censu Galea, whip David Agius and parliamentary assistants Robert Arrigo and Franco Debono, have all taken a political risk by going against the official position of the Nationalist Party. But their “yes” vote shows that they truly represent the people who elected them. Again, for them the people’s decision came first.

That Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, who launched the debate on divorce in June last year, and Jesmond Mugliett voted in favour of the divorce bill is no surprise. It is only thanks to them that we had a referendum after all, as they were the only two Nationalist MPs who voted in favour of the Labour Party motion in March that paved the way for May’s national poll.

I must mention here the 32 Labour MPs who, with their yes vote, “made sure”, to use the words of Opposition Leader Joseph Muscat, that what the people voted for will be implemented. It is also thanks to them that democracy will prevail. Without the collective responsibility of the Labour MPs – all except for the hardliner Adrian Vassallo and the hesitant Marie Louise Coleiro Preca – and the individual nerve of the small group of Nationalist MPs, the 28 May result would have been rejected.

There is another side to the coin. And it is with a deep disappointment, sadness and anger that I condemn the undemocratic behaviour of all those MPs who voted “no” to divorce or abstained. I cannot trust them again.

With their “no” vote or abstention, they showed that their conscience comes first, and not what the people decided. They are selfish, insensitive and uncaring, and are not fit to be called the people’s representatives. They chose to pass the buck to the electorate to get their opinion on divorce, but when the people voted against their wishes, they did not accept their choice.

To me, that is the perfect example of intolerance. The Nationalist MPs who voted no or abstained last Wednesday are more or less the same people who, eight years ago, lambasted the Labour Party when it did not accept the vote on European Union membership. Now, they have done what Labour did in 2003, and think they can get away with it just because they say it was a political, not a moral, issue. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Those who voted “no” closed both eyes to the people’s decision. They simply did not give a damn that the majority voted “yes”. Did they forget what happened in 1981? Or is the “majority rule” cry only valid when it suits them?

Those who abstained tried to please their conscience and the voters but, to me, sitting on the fence is either a sign of cowardice or a sign that they are political opportunists. The PN often accuses Dr Muscat of trying to please one and all. Well, that is what these MPs tried to do. In vain.

When election time comes, voters should remember that the MPs who voted “no” or abstained chose themselves before anything or anyone else. When the number one is to be written on the ballot sheet, voters should not forget that these MPs disregarded what the people want.

Of course, in this scenario the main culprit is Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi. He is not an ordinary politician. He is not an ordinary MP. He is the leader of the party. He is the prime minister. And a prime minister who ignores what the people voted for, and prefers to listen to his conscience, does not deserve to be trusted.

The next time Dr Gonzi says he respects the will of the people, remember what he did last Wednesday. Dr Gonzi’s excuse for his “no” vote is that he wants to remain consistent and that, after all, the divorce bill passed through the second reading. But a prime minister who chooses his conscience over the people’s will makes a grave mistake.

It was the Prime Minister who pushed for a referendum on divorce, thinking that, in their majority, people would vote against its introduction. But then he was unable to accept that his calculations were wrong, and hard-headedly stuck to his personal beliefs.

Dr Gonzi’s “no” vote last Wednesday is very much on the same lines as the way former Labour Leader Alfred Sant refused to accept the EU referendum result and said that his partnership idea had won. Perhaps what Dr Gonzi did was worse – Dr Sant’s “manipulation” was baseless, almost a joke, but Dr Gonzi’s vote against the will of the people was real.

To have a prime minister who disregards the people’s choice to satisfy his conscience is a blow to democracy and one to his own credibility and that of the party he leads. Elsewhere, a prime minister in Dr Gonzi’s position would have chosen the honorable way out, and resigned. It is the only way that the Nationalist Party can improve the slim chances it has of winning the next election.