In no way should a sense of panic be induced among Europeans. However it is also quite clear that security measures around public places as well as information gathering procedures need to be strengthened. Some sectors need considerable upgrading, others will require the introduction of new measures.

Understandably, Europe cannot be converted into a fortress in its internal organization or in the way it faces the outside world. Nobody enjoys a life spent surrounded by soldiers on the lookout, primed for warfare. Meawhile, the catastrophic development of terrorist action has to be kept in check.

It is also true that easily, many of the security measures which must be introduced could be abused, undermining citizens’ rights to privacy. However, while all the counter-measures that could contain such abuse need to be implemented, I fail to see any alternative to having to accept the risk of seeing privacy abused.

Faced with the risk of seeing innocent lives destroyed and bodies burnt to shreds on the one hand, and accepting that citizens’ private life could be undermined, I would prefer the second alternative.

The conclusion holds equally for this country.

***

How to write Maltese

The polemic regarding how Maltese had best be written has continued among connoisseurs of the language. One doubts whether too many people follow it even though it raises issues that concern us all.

How Maltese gets written today, will influence in a big way how people come to understand it, talk and use it tomorrow. In fact how it could survive as a national language.

Some still fail to understand how what in the past used to be considered as a mistake, now has become the correct way to write. Others insist that orthography should reflect contemporary ways of speech. Otherwise, one’s output will be classicist in expression, but surely archaic. There are still others who argue that orthographic rules cannot be designed simply with the aim of helping students get an easy passmark in their language exams.

They all are on the right track.    

***

Accountability

Parliamentary democracy is frequently criticised because it gives rise to a plethora of polemics. Many become personalised. Few enjoy this.

Still, polemics serve to highlight issues that have national importance in ways that make sense to citizens and grab their attention. When polemics subside, the suspicion grows that politicians of all sides are in cahoots, and look away from where things are being wrongly implemented here and there.

Effectively in a democracy, polemics are essential to promote accountability. In a free and “theatrical” debate about allegation and counter-allegation, the decisions that are taken (or sidelined) in the national interest, are placed under a searchlight, open to the judgement of all citizens.

Some claim that this is hardly better than subjecting issues to so-called people’s courts, which is unacceptable. Even more so because it makes people who would like to commit themselves to serious action put distance between them and the political system, because they are not ready to experience the heat of  controversy.

Such arguments are less than convincing.