President George Vella’s term is up in just under a year – but there are worries, even in Vella’s own mind, on whether Malta’s two major political parties can reach an agreement on who will succeed him.
Vella’s successor will be the first President to have to be appointed by a cross-party majority. Up until now, any Presidential nominee only needed a simple majority – ergo, the backing of the government – and while in the past effort has always been made for the President to gain unanimous backing from Parliament, as was almost the case for Vella’s appointment (two PD MPs boycotted the vote), there is a lot more riding on this agreement being reached now.
Recent history suggests that it may be more difficult than in the past for an agreement to be reached: Anthony Mifsud, for instance, remained Ombudsman for 20 months after his term expired because the government and Opposition couldn’t reach an agreement on his replacement, while the government felt that it was forced to change the law concerning the appointment of the Standards Commissioner because the two sides failed to reach an agreement on who should succeed George Hyzler.
There won’t be any possibility of the government doing that if there is no agreement on who should succeed Vella though. There is no anti-deadlock mechanism in place as it had been excluded from the reform bill when it went through
It is safe to say that Vella is worried that recent history may repeat itself when it comes to choosing his successor, and that he may well have to extend his own term as President because no agreement is reached.
“It’s difficult to say who should follow, but what I say is that I hope that there will be an agreement on a person, so we don’t end up like we did in the matter of the Ombudsman,” he said when asked about the prospect of his replacement needing a cross-party majority in an exclusive interview with The Malta Independent on Sunday.
“As head of state, I hope that there are talks from now so that if there is someone in the minds of who has to appoint my successor in a year, there is time for them to discuss and agree. I don’t want to see this office be blocked due to the lack of agreement on a person,” he said.
“Then what happens? Based on what the law says now the President would have to stay in his position until a successor is chosen, which is something that, I can assure you, I don’t want to go through,” he continued.
A President having to extend his term in the head of state is unprecedented in Maltese political history, but such as relations between the PL and PN at the moment that it is a prospect which cannot be excluded.
After all, the President himself has been at the centre of a couple of controversies relating to some of the government’s reforms – particularly those on IVF and, more recently, abortion.
The government may be inclined towards favouring someone who, in their mind, would pose less opposition to their more progressive reforms; a prospect which the PN may not be enthused with.
What is certain is that both sides need to sit round the table – from now – to start to discuss Vella’s successor.
Make no mistake, Malta could be plunged into a constitutional crisis the likes of which it has never seen if an agreement is not reached.
A year may be a long time in politics, but it’s not a long time at all to reach an agreement on an important position such as this – especially given the current climate between the two parties.