Labour's 'pact' and the Constitution

It is now official. The leader and two deputy leaders of the Malta Labour Party have declared publicly that the electoral manifesto approved by the party itself and presented to the electorate now required a further pact to make it more credible!

The pact does not actually refer to this election but to the next. The three men promise that if, in their judgment, yes, in their sole judgment consider that a number of aims would not have been reached, then they, and no one else, will decide whether or not to contest the 2008 election.

Voters, please note that the pact was signed before all the Labour candidates and the main officials of the MLP. This means that the party seems to be accepting this leadership for the entire period of the next legislature. Otherwise, what significance would this pact have to the nation's voters if the three contest the 2008 elections as mere backbenchers?

At a time when it is important that voters be presented with clear options, have we now created electoral promises of the premier league and others of the second division? What about the other important promises made in the MLP manifesto? Does the leadership trio not feel as obliged to honour them as those mentioned in the pact?

In the 1998 electoral manifesto, Eddie Fenech Adami had promised that a Nationalist government would defrost the EU application that had been frozen by the Sant administration.

He had also promised that a Nationalist government would enter into negotiations without loss of time in order to give Malta the opportunity of making it by the next enlargement of the EU. This he also did through the sheer hard work of his government, the negotiating team and many other hardworking and competent people.

Above all, Dr Fenech Adami promised that it would be us voters who would ultimately decide the issue. Dr Fenech Adami did not require to add to his credibility the signing of a pact in the form of a contract. His word was enough.

The prime minister went on to uphold each and every promise, including that of holding the referendum.

Today, there are at least 143,000 of us voters still awaiting Alfred Sant to honour his pact with us. On March 8 we voted yes to the European Union and we are now expecting to see the prime minister to go to Athens on Wednesday to sign the accession treaty. More than that, we authorised him to do so in terms of the Constitution of Malta and in terms of the Referenda Act. This pact was countersigned by the voters on March 8 who are now awaiting for it to be honoured.

When Dr Sant says he will not sign the accession treaty if his party is elected, he is in effect saying that he would be ignoring a pact the electorate made in the March 8 referendum. So, has the Labour trio now taken upon themselves alone to decide which pacts with the electorate are to be honoured and which not?

The rules of the game are established only by the Constitution of Malta. The only pact which exists between the electorate and the politicians is the Constitution and the laws passed in terms of the Constitution.

It provides the referees who decide whether the political players are playing the game. We have the Electoral Commission which ensured the legality and objectivity of the referendum and which will ensure to an equal degree the legality and objectivity of the electoral process.

It is now up to the electorate to decide. Its decision needs no pact with the players for it to be implemented.

For the politicians to be credible, they have to present clear and straightforward electoral promises. The electorate expects that the electoral manifesto be implemented in its entirety. They do not expect to be told just a few days before the election, as the pact seems to suggest, that there are promises and promises, core promises in the pact and peripheral promises in the electoral manifesto.

At each election, the one and only pact which exists is the Constitution of Malta. It represents the one and only pact between the people and the political class.

Until the March 8 referendum is honoured, for us yes voters the Labour pact is a classic case of "once bitten twice shy".