The accusation of sexual harassment against John Suda has dominated the local papers over the week-end and Monday morning's written news. I will not delve into this particular case as I agree with the accused that he is innocent until proven guilty and furthermore I only know what has been reported in the media.

However, I cannot fail but comment on the way the Times of Malta and Malta Today are treating this news item. Strangely enough both newspapers have chosen to shut down their 'comments' column.  I can assure readers that had John Suda been a priest, his treatment would have been different and the comments section would have been kept open and bubbly. One can argue that in the case of priests, the victims were minors. But there were also cases where the alleged victims were adults and the press treatment was the same.

Hypocrisy in Malta knows no bounds. Even those individuals who have shown solidarity would have commented differently had the alleged acts been committed by a priest. Be that as it may, at least The Malta Independent here adopted those same policy that it used in every other case of alleged sexual harassment and did not block the running commentary. It is interesting to point out that in Spain there was a TV series where adolescents were expected to go nude and those pupils who had difficulty with nudity were kicked out. This series was called Un Paso Adelante. Therefore, in this case, it is a question whether adolescents were fully informed or not about their training sessions and whether they were told before hand what the training session was going to be.

Meanwhile, I wish to seize this opportunity to express solidarity with The Times on another matter; the frozen of assets of the editor, Steve Mallia and Ariadne Massa for having failed to pay libel damages to the Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses. The explanation given by The Times is that a Constitutional case is ongoing and therefore the newspaper is awaiting the outcome of the Constitutional Court before proceeding to pay. Incidentally, I still remember when the Times praised our Magistrates' Courts for moving forward after the four priests, accused of sexual harassment of minors, filed a Constitutional case claiming that they were being denied a fair hearing because of the media coverage of their case. On this occasion, the Magistrates' Court did not await the Constitutional court but decreed on the matter and passed sentence, which was then confirmed in Court of Appeal. Therefore, in the Editor's case, the Court is being consistent.

Nonetheless, I agree with the Institute of Journalists that this sentence is unjust. It is not completely clear whether this injustice derives from the law itself or from the magistrate's application of the law. At least, judging from the reaction of the Chamber of Advocates, the injustice is due to the law rather than to its application or better interpretation of the court.

The injustice lies not in the fact that the Court is insisting that the fine should be paid, but in the rather personal facet that this case has now assumed. The injustice lies in the fact that the personal assets of the two journalists have been frozen rather than those of the publishing house. It should be remembered that they are both employees of the publishing house and it is the publishing house that should shoulder ultimate responsibility. In the modern world, each publishing house has its editorial policies and agendas and what is published represents the editorial agenda of the publishing house, which can often go beyond that of its editor. Hence, this sentence is a bit 'sticky'.

Clearly, I have to hope that the courts are not trying to send a subtle message to journalists, who, sometimes, are not benevolent towards the inadequacies of the judicature. Otherwise, this would really be an adieu to the Freedom of the Press. As one French scholar has written, we are living more and more in a Republic of Lawyers. And I fear that these journalists have been dragged into the limelight because they were easier prey than the publishing house, whose historic links with powerful individuals and organizations wielding supremacy behind the scenes are an open secret in Malta.  Another conclusion that comes to mind is that Mallia and Massa were targeted so as to embarrass the Allied Newspapers which today is known to have become politically Red or perhaps because it is also in the red.