A grim view of the Constitution

Malta presents a truly grim picture when it comes to showing any interest, or for that matter any knowledge, about the European Constitution. Eurobarometer results of last November show that the Maltese rank very low on a European scale: 72 per cent have never heard of the European Constitution and only 31 per cent support it.

Naturally, the cause behind this low level of knowledge is lack of information. The responsibility rests with the state, the parties, the politicians, MIC, the media and last but not least the citizens themselves.

European issues are not necessarily at the forefront of our daily agenda. Though we are self-professed Europeans and citizens of the world, our own internal news, however small, does not seem to leave any space for the greater European and global issues.

The effort of preparing and formulating the European Constitution began three years ago. The project involved the deepening of the European Union alongside its enlargement. There are differences as to whether the original objectives have been reached, but there is no doubt that the Constitution-builders have achieved improvements in the functionality of the Union and reduced in many respects the democratic deficit in the Union's institutions.

The values of human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights are institutionalised. Parity, equality, and particularly equality between men and women, are protected unequivocally in the European Constitution.

The role of the European Parliament is reinforced further with the control of approval and dismissal of the European Commission. The national parliaments are also assigned a role within the functioning of the European Union, being given the right of recourse to the European Court of Justice and the right of early warning for proposed decisions and legislation.

European citizens will be able to ask the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament to enact specific legislation. The social market economy that will aim for "full employment and social progress within a protected and improved environment" is also constitutionally endorsed.

The introduction of the post of Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Union expresses the determination of the member states to have one voice in the international arena. The flag, the anthem and the emblem of the Union symbolise the political vision of "unity in diversity" of the European peoples within the remit of a European pluralistic society of tolerance, justice and solidarity.

Acceptance by the member states and candidate member states of the new method of decision-making by qualified majority - even if it is increased - shows that there is a readiness to forgo nationalistic approaches in favour of a culture based on the rule of consensus and compromise achieved through equal, democratic discussion, mutual tolerance and mutual respect.

Member states have two years to ratify the treaty as is, without amendments. Should it not be approved by all, this will most likely precipitate a crisis and the 25 heads of state will need to scratch their heads and decide the next step.

It all depends on how many rejections there will be, whether the governments of the states concerned will resubmit the treaty to further referendums, or whether any of the rejecting states will demand changes before they seek fresh popular or parliamentary approval.

So far, just five member states (Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovenia and Spain) have ratified the Constitution, while seven (Denmark, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Poland and the UK) have pledged to hold referendums on the seminal treaty. Poland is still undecided on how it will ratify the Treaty.

Here in Malta, the Nationalist government arbitrarily decided that ratification of the treaty did not require a direct vote of the people. It preferred to stick to the constitutional provisions providing for parliamentary ratification.

From the cynical point of view, seeing that no member state has the opportunity to amend the treaty anymore, what is the point of extensive public debate at this point? From the long-term point of view, the absence of any public discussion or involvement by citizens in the Constitution's approval, only serves to increase the democratic deficit that the Constitution is supposed to plug.

Granted, some articles have appeared in the local press, the topic has also been taken up in some radio and TV discussion programmes and there have been a couple of seminars. But that's the extent of it.

It is, however, time to assume responsibility. The government is the first that must do it. The European Commission and the European Parliament have delegated to governments the responsibility of informing citizens about the Constitution. The Maltese government has done next to nothing to this effect. It should be a matter of self-respect for the Nationalist government to defend and promote its signature of the Treaty.

A public discussion about the European Constitution should begin. The Maltese citizen needs to be guided as to what the Constitution is all about. We are talking about a treaty that purports to shape the future of Europe, provide the means for its smooth functioning and further enlargement, and enshrine fundamental rights for its citizens.

In a recent Eurobarometer survey, 72 per cent of people in Malta said they have never even heard of the draft Constitution. Some 60 per cent who know about it admit to very limited knowledge, while those who claim they know its content are only 12 per cent. The lack of knowledge explains why the Maltese have the third highest percentage of people replying they do not know if they are in favour of the Constitution (56 per cent).

Only 31 per cent of the Maltese said they were in favour of the Constitution - the fifth lowest "approval" rate in the Union - compared to a 49 per cent approval rating Union-wide. Thirteen per cent are opposed. Some 26 per cent cite lack of information as a reason why they oppose the Constitution.

The survey also tried to establish what the Constitution means to citizens. When asked why they are in favour, 13 per cent of the Maltese believe it is essential for the smooth running of European institutions, 18 per cent consider it essential to pursue the European construction and five per cent think it strengthens the EU over the US.

Quite a high percentage (30 per cent) believe it strengthens democracy in Europe, while only 17 per cent consider it strengthens the feeling of a European identity. A good 21 per cent said they are against European integration, foreshadowing the 18 per cent who oppose the Constitution on the ground that it reduces Malta's sovereignty.

The Nationalist government enjoys attacking the opposition Labour Party for its failure to immediately signify its support for the EU Constitution, but the truth is that it is the Labour Party that has taken the debate about it seriously. That debate might expose fissures in Labour opinion, but at least attests to a healthy, democratic exercise which the government party and the country have eschewed.