Editorial

Self-regulation places journalism in Malta on the same level as that of the profession in other advanced countries. According to Chief Justice Emeritus Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici, chairman of the Press Ethics Commission, it has been proved that better results are obtained whenever a profession is self-regulating.

Having said that, he is the first to admit that such scandals as those involving Enron have thrown a slur on the ethical uprightness of many professions. As a direct result of these scandals, American industrialists are today showing greater concern for the need to act ethically and this should supersede the need for profit to motivate all activity.

The fact that the Press Ethics Commission has heard a little more than 20 cases in the past two years is an indication that journalists are generally ethically correct - more so when compared to their foreign counterparts in some other countries. Yet, it may also be an indication that the public is not sufficiently informed on the workings of the commission and how they can seek a remedy.

So the announcement last week of a code of procedure for the commission, a website with all the relevant information (www.maltapressclub.org/pec.html) and an attempt to bring the commission closer to the public through the start of a public campaign, is a praiseworthy move.

Prof. Mifsud Bonnici made it clear that only complaints against journalists could be brought before the commission but the definition of a bona fide journalist is one who originates articles or media content on a regular basis - and that includes politicians (for quite a few are both).

All journalists can be called for hearings before the commission, not only those who are members of The Malta Press Club. Remedy from the commission is offered to victims seeking a speedy public condemnation of journalists and who do not need to go through lengthy, expensive court procedures.

What is even better, so far as the general population is concerned, is that these procedures are absolutely free of charge since, to their credit, the members of the commission offer their services completely voluntarily.

Although the commission was established by The Malta Press Club five years ago, it is completely independent and acts totally autonomously, with TMPC keeping more than an arm's length, apart from appointing its members.

To make the workings of the commission even more accessible to the public, its website includes a number of frequently asked questions that explain the entire procedure in a clearly understandable way. Among the information given is that the commission undertakes to decide each case within three months at maximum.

When there are breaches of the code of ethics, it is up to the commission to see whether or not its decision is made public, although it normally would. In each case, it decides what is appropriate, depending on how serious the breach of ethics is. If the verdict is that there is no breach of ethics, normally only the parties involved are informed.

Ethical behaviour is often best appreciated in the breach. Self-regulation has worked well in Malta, with the number of cases falling foul of ethical standards generally being too small to raise concern.

Yet, it is good that the public is made aware of the workings of the ethics commission and of its own rights to take cases of alleged breaches before it as this would help to ensure that journalism keeps to the generally high ethical standards that we have become accustomed to in our media.