The Labour Party's unequivocal defeat in the April 12 general election shocked many of the party's rank-and-file who genuinely believed that Alfred Sant would again become prime minister. After all, it was Dr Sant himself who, on the morrow of the March 8 referendum on Malta's European Union membership, had triumphantly asserted that "partnership" (his party's alternative to membership) "had won", even though the Yes votes had surpassed the Noes by almost 19,500.

Flying in the face of all logic, Dr Sant convinced most of his party's supporters and - most importantly - the powerful party media, that the Yes votes had managed only a "minority" of all those eligible to vote. The implication was that Labour had enough support to beat the Nationalists in the all-important general election which, rather than the 'bogus' referendum, Dr Sant always insisted, would definitely decide the matter of EU membership.

That stand, for most people, was a watershed in Dr Sant's credibility. From March 9 on, this credibility was in freefall. Confirmation of this came in the form of a U-turn on the Gozo Ministry, in the blatantly opportunistic promise of a two-month tax holiday for all (and a five to ten-year exemption for farmers!), and in the theatrical "pact with the people".

But the writing was on the wall. Dr Sant was aware that a substantial number of Labour supporters had voted Yes because they truly believed that EU membership, and not the inexistent 'partnership', was the best way ahead for Malta. He tried to woo them back by promising another referendum (another stab at his credibility), but this did not find much takers.

The election came. Despite Labour's promises and exertions, it managed to increase its share of the vote over 1998 - when the showdown with Dom Mintoff must have cost Dr Sant quite a few votes - by only 0.5 percentage points, and this time 86-year-old Mintoff was campaigning vigorously for a Labour vote. But Dr Sant's credibility had obviously run out and the majority, once again, by over 12,000 votes (over 14,000 if one includes the AD total) clearly reiterated it wanted Malta to join the EU.

Less than an hour after the result became clear, a chastened Dr Sant acknowledged defeat and declared that the people's will had to be respected. Just over 24 hours later he said in a radio interview that he would not seek re-election as party leader, emulating what his predecessor, Dr Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici, had done after his second consecutive electoral defeat in 1992.

But barely had tributes to Dr Sant (including by some Labour stalwarts in this very paper) appeared than the Labour leader apparently started having second thoughts. Or rather, his coterie - which holds the party "machinery", as Dom Mintoff had defined it - firmly in its grip, decided it had too much to lose, and urged him to reconsider.

With Dr John Attard Montalto, who was known to favour EU membership but who loyally followed the party line, declaring himself a candidate for the leadership, followed by Dr Anglu Farrugia, and eventally by Evarist Bartolo, the Sant backers successfully turned last Thursday's May Day demonstration in Valletta into a show of support for the present leader, who obliged them by announcing that he would, in fact, be contesting the leadership once again.

It must be said that most Labour supporters - as confirmed by the Xarabank survey published on Friday - would prefer to stick by Dr Sant, rather than see the party change its leader for the third time in 18 years. But loyalty and gratitude apart (Dr Sant, after all, succeeded to modernise the party and did manage to free it from the violent element which had characterised it for far too long, leading it to power in 1996), are the Labour rank and file convinced that their losing horse can become a winner again? Or rather, are they sure that the credibility which Dr Sant threw overboard, particularly in the past months, can be regained?

True, Dr Sant said his party will accept the people's will and shall continue to work for the good of all Maltese "in the new circumstances created through our country's membership of the EU", but how credible is he? Will the change, which, he insisted last Thursday, was necessary within the party, be such as to make the Labour Party a credible alternative government?

Interestingly, Dr Sant encouraged "as many as possible" to come forward and contest the leadership, promising to give them "every opportunity" to present their case. But this was certainly not the experience of Dr Attard Montalto, who, hours after he declared his intention to run for leader, was denied airtime on the party's broadcasting media. Will the leadership contest be a fair one? That, in itself, could be an indication of the party's credibility.