The Malta Independent 21 March 2023, Tuesday
View E-Paper

After the furore

Alfred Sant MEP Thursday, 2 February 2023, 08:00 Last update: about 3 months ago

Polemics about the courts and delays in how judicial and police systems operate bubbled up again. It made waves in social and traditional media. So what?

Will anythng change even if the Prime Minister and the minister in charge of national security speak up? We were reminded of all the Justice Ministers, Judges and Chief Judges who have been telling us the same things decade after decade. So what?


In all statements made, or almost all, reasons (which made sense) were advanced to explain the problems and how to solve them. The problems are still there, even if there were times when attempts were made to implement what was being suggested.

What we need is a clear, detailed programme that spells out how solutions are going to be carried out. There’s no need for all of them to come into effect as of tomorrow. But surely we need to have reasonable timeframe detailing when promises and targets will be met. As was done, rightly or wrongly, with the roads infrastructure project.



About forty years ago, perhaps more, the pro-privatisation fashion or wave suddenly gathered momentum. Projects that were being run by governments -- some not so well, other quite decently -- were sold to private owners, or else converted into state-private joint ventues. Many enterprises were infrastructural in nature and up to then had been considered as only suitable for public sector management, such as in the case of electricity or water supply.

What really took place was that the ownership of those bits of the enterprises concerned that could make profits was offloaded to the private sector. In this way the services being delivered would become more efficient to the benefit of consumers.

People have become so accustomed to privatisation that nobody mentions any more the consumer benefits it bestows. Perhaps the time has come to reconsider this point.    



It’s evident that the Maltese people are deeply divided over the abortion issue. There are those who agree abortion should be allowed, and those who are absolutely against the idea. Curiously, while everybody is appealing for a “mature” and “rational” debate on the matter, many on both sides consider that those who disagree with them are negating values that should fundamentally define human life.

The people who  stand against abortion describe it as nothing but the murder of a human individual which can in no way be allowed. Those who agree that abortion should be legalised, argue that its prohibition amounts to a profound and cruel block against the life, health and personal autonomy of women.

Now I think  that genuinely, both sides believe they are defending authentic life values. However as they do so and in the way by which they advance their position, they exclude any idea that a compromise could be reached, one that could be acceptable to both. For both, the stand-off is a zero sum game.

  • don't miss