Ridiculous court sentences

While I do not wish in any way to interfere with the work of our law courts, I feel I could not remain silent after reading in The Times (August 20) that an Englishman was "given a three-month jail term, suspended for a year, for defiling, (according to Dr Joe Brincat in The Sunday Times, August 24 the charge actually was "violent indecent assault") a 12-year-old girl". The person concerned is reported to have pleaded guilty to the charge. The crime took place at a hotel in St Paul's Bay on August 10 at about 9 a.m.

In practical layman's terms, this means that the person who confessed the crime and pleaded guilty got away scot-free. He is probably already in the UK by the time this is published.

On the other hand, in the same page of The Times, it was reported that a North African man was imprisoned for three months because he broke his father-in-law's Telecare equipment, a crime compounded by the "arrogant and vulgar behaviour" of the man concerned.

Another North African has been jailed for nine days after pleading guilty to importing a monkey in his hand-luggage (The Times, August 22). Yet another North African person had earlier been sentenced to two months imprisonment for trying to smuggle a ghecko.

These sentences are ridiculous and make our judicial system, if not also the judiciary, a laughing stock.

They raise the question whether the law is impartial when rulings are dispensed against persons of different races. When parliament was discussing the issue of probation last year, I pointed out that probation, or suspended jail terms, should on no account be handed out for serious crimes, such as defilement, rape, armed robbery, serious bodily harm and the like.

These pleas fell on deaf ears. But the administration of justice has not been enhanced.

Only recently, I criticised the police for turning a blind eye to rampant prostitution in Gzira and Ta' Xbiex and to obscene acts in public places by homosexuals in Gzira garden. I also noted that, by all appearances, nothing is being done to stop nude bathing in public in certain places.

I have been criticised for not minding my own business and I have even been labelled as a person of extreme right-wing views. As a member of parliament it is my duty to speak on behalf of those of my constituents who believe that the law is equal to all and that the main priority is for the law to uphold the social order and the public peace.

I feel in conscience that it is the business of all MPs to voice their criticism when the courts dish out the most ridiculous sentences for very serious crimes and when the authorities responsible for law enforcement fail to control criminality perpetrated under their very nose. No wonder crime is on the increase.

Trying to ensure that Malta is a better place to live in, and speaking out for the better upholding of the law is neither right-wing nor left-wing. It has to do with decency and civic duty, with fairness in the administration of justice and with upholding the law by giving "teeth to make it meaningful".