I still need to understand the logic of the protests that the Opposition organized about the defamation case raised in court with respect to Dr Jason Azzopardi.

What was the issue: that it was feared he would be found guilty while innocent? But is this then a declaration of no confidence in the judiciary?

Or was the point that he was going to be found guilty, and that as an Opposition representative he should benefit from immunity on all criminal charges regarding the matter at hand and others?  So, if that was the point, for whom should immunity apply? Opposition spokespersons only, or should it also cover say, government ministers?

Beyond all this, was the point being made that all defamation in public life should no longer be considered as a criminal act (even if then, one would need to define the limits of the public domain)? However if one follows this trend of thought, how would it square with the insistence by the Opposition to retain a law which makes vilification of the Catholic religion, a criminal act? Is vilification of religion not a form of defamation?

***

Who paid?

The worldwide hit that ICJ journalists made, and are still making, with their publication of the Panama papers is well deserved. The lid has been removed from a huge pot where manoeuvres and stratagems are brewed so that the wealthy can keep what they own and do hidden, all for their own sweet reasons.

The millions of files that were revealed needed studies and analyses that have been proceeding for a year and over. This work has now been carried out. Which raises the question: who financed the project? It must have been quite expensive? Who paid?

According to Wikileaks, at least in part, the project was financed by the US government and the financier George Soros; both were interested in revealing Putin’s ways of doing things.

Another point concerns the manner by which these documents came to light. The ICJ claim that they themselves do not know whom they received it from.  It could have been a whistleblower; or it could have been sent by a mysterious agency run by people unknown – so who knows how it managed to obtain the stuff?

A final point: the ICJ declare they have edited the files, among other reasons in order to safeguard persons who could be put in danger if their identity is revealed. But what editing procedure was followed? 

***

Polarisation

Her Excellency the President of the Republic Ms Coleiro-Preca was right to warn against political confrontation that is taken too far. She correctly referred to the events of the sixties and eighties of the previous century as examples of what we should do our utmost to avoid.

I witnessed from close by her efforts during the eighties to calm matters and reduce division, even if slanderous voices allege the contrary.

There are two reasons why today’s problems have arisen: despite the Labour government’s huge achievements to date, it is also committing mistakes that are costing it dear; on the other hand, many of the elements making up the Opposition Party still cannot accept that they have lost their access to state power and are prepared to go quite far in their efforts to set the clock back.