The Corruption Perception Index that Transparency International has just published for 2024 is a measure of how others see our country. Our country is ranked among those 47 countries which are moving downhill in the steep road of good governance. Transparency International considers that the situation in Malta is getting worse.

This is the real Vision 2050: moving downhill in the governance roadmap.

There is nothing to rejoice about in the Transparency International ranking. It is damaging. Just as damaging as the grey listing which Malta endured some time ago, and which somehow, we managed to wriggle out of.

Whether we like it or not, as a country, Malta is continuously under the international spotlight. Our behaviour as a country is continuously compared to what is considered to be the norm, that is, what is the acceptable behaviour elsewhere, in other countries which consider themselves to be parliamentary democracies.

To be blunt about it, others see us as a country which is sliding into corruption. Corruption is being normalised. This is one of the parameters through which our democracy is measured. As a result, it also signifies that our democracy is under threat.

In these columns I have said it in not so many words, week in week out. Transparency International is emphasising what is obvious to most of us living on this rock.

It is a fact that the only criminal action initiated by the authorities against corruption have been taken as a result of the initiative of private citizens who requested the Courts to investigate. This was done as a result of the fact that the police and the attorney general, by law authorised and empowered to act, failed to do so.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey listing resulted due to very weak institutions. We are now in a worse situation. The institutions which had to act against corruption are, as a matter of fact, anesthesised.

Readers will undoubtedly recollect that the Court of Appeal, when dealing with the Vitals/Stewards Global Health Care case, had explained the matter in very clear language. While emphasising the fraudulent nature of the hospitals' deal, the Court of Appeal had then stated that it believed that there was collusion: senior government officials were complicit in the hospitals' privatisation fraud. Collusion, as readers are undoubtedly aware, is secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy intended to deceive.

The current debate on changes to the Criminal Code, to make it even more difficult for private citizens to request criminal investigations, is an eye opener following the institutional capture of the police and the attorney general. As a result, the corrupt will be more secure, in the knowledge that possibilities leading to their eventual investigation and possible prosecution will now be closer to zero.

In a situation where institutional capture makes it practically impossible for criminal prosecutions to commence, it is obvious that persons of goodwill leak information which, when used by civil society can make it possible to provide an alternative line of action. This was essentially the case put forward by Robert Aquilina on behalf of good governance NGO Repubblika in contesting the decision of the Attorney General not to prosecute some of those involved in the Pilatus money laundering case. It is indeed unfortunate that the Magistrate dealing with the case was more preoccupied with the leak of the Pilatus Bank confidential magisterial inquiry document than with its contents.

The leaking of confidential information is not to be encouraged. However, when such a leak serves the common good, we have to be thankful that there still exist a handful of public-spirited individuals who are risking a lot. When the institutions have been captured there is no realistic alternative.

In Parliament various PN Members of Parliament are doing a good job in exposing the proposed reforms to the Criminal Code as another sham. Unfortunately, their good work is continuously undermined by one simple fact: the Leader of the Opposition is a certified tax evader who cannot ever be credible when speaking on corruption or good governance. As a result of this basic fact, even the Parliamentary Opposition is effectively compromised.

This is another valid reason why we need a third voice in Parliament. An uncompromised voice which can lead the way to good governance, which we so desperately require.

An architect and civil engineer, the author is a former Chairperson of ADPD-The Green Party in Malta.  [email protected] ,   http://carmelcacopardo.wordpress.com