The illegal immigration crisis - with Malta's obligation to assist asylum seekers on one hand and the emergence of racist sentiments on the other - has ushered in a political debate not seen in years. Maltese society seems to be going through a soul searching process that has given rise to, among other things, talk of radical right and policies put forward by a pressure group calling itself Alleanza Nazzjonali Repubblikana - Republican National Alliance, which says it wants to "defend the country from the silent invasion of illegal immigrants". The Times sought the opinion of academics from various disciplines at the University of Malta in a bid to define this phenomenon, also speaking to the ANR's national secretary, Philip Beattie, himself an academic.
Dominic Fenech, history lecturer.
Beyond racial hatred, what we have before us is a typically local brand of Christian fundamentalism, in party dress, in the same tradition of those who wanted to entrench anti-abortion legislation in our Constitution. (It is no coincidence that proponents of both pieces of backwardness used the same labels to deride their critics.)
Their leader, protesting that he was "proud to be Maltese", appealed to his critics not to call him and his followers racist. Bigots, then, because they are not just against non-white foreigners: they are against anything that threatens their cherished habits and their constipated myths of what national identity consists of.
These people affect to define what being "Maltese" means and they define it according to pre-conciliar Christian values and anachronistic interpretations of "our centuries-old ethnic and cultural identity".
All waffly slogans that mean nothing on the ground. They are nobody to say what being Maltese means and if being Maltese means sharing their visions and values; it should be nothing to be proud of.
So basically, unless they can gain power and make us all think alike with the help of castor oil, they are mainly a blot on our national image. Immigrants are a good place to start for any fascist party.
Mary Darmanin, lecturer at the Faculty of Education.
Rightist groups usually become popular and gain power at a time of economic recession and when there is a cutback in the welfare state. Malta is passing through such a time, so it comes as no surprise that people express rightist feelings, which are mainly based on fear.
The people who support rightist groups are not necessarily racists themselves. They may be genuinely feeling threatened by cutbacks in the health services, education and other important services.
So I am worried to see rightist sentiments expressed in this way. But what is even more worrying is that illegal immigrants are being blamed for problems for which the state is to blame.
If people have to wait in long queues at a health centre, they feel distressed, especially if detained immigrants needing health care are escorted into clinics handcuffed.
But the problem is a cut in health funding and not illegal immigrants. If unemployment is rife, the problem is the economy and not illegal immigrants.
However, many people do not have the education to see this, which explains the confusion of concepts and different intentions of people showing support to this pressure group.
Edward Scicluna, economics lecturer.
Let us put it this way. We had always felt that Maltese Christianity was paper-thin. Now we have proof. Way back in the 1970s when blacks in Africa were so much beloved from afar by our missions' donations and racism was what other people practised in the US, South Africa or the UK, I had realised that some segments of the Maltese abroad were no less racist than any other nationality.
Although immigrants themselves in Canada, Australia or the UK, I recall some Maltese looking unkindly to any newly arriving Pakistani or dark skinned person next door whose cooking smelled funny. At that time they were very worried about the value of their property and that their children should not befriend their neighbours' children. Malta has its own normal distribution of centrists, far rightists and leftists. Being small, it was difficult to get themselves organised. When a bulk of people for lack of open mindedness or proper "global" education become prejudiced against a particular group of people, these extremist groups (whether left or right) become nourished and dare to come out in the open.
This is no different to how certain religious sects took root here at a time when Catholic religious fervour was waning. How should we address this issue? Unless any of these xenophobic groups becomes violent and practises illegal behaviour, I believe we should show tolerance, which is just the thing these groups are not showing towards other people of other nationalities, skin colour or religion.
But we need leadership to lead not follow misguided sentiments. I am in fact utterly amazed how the Church is standing by and not taking a stand on such unchristian values and attitudes to the poorest people on earth.
Pierre Schembri Wismayer, lecturer in anatomy and cell biology.
The reason for the increasing support toward rightist groups is that many people are scared of losing their job.
Many immigrants manage to find a job, legally or otherwise, once they are freed from detention. And, I'm sure there are employers who abuse of their situation and pay them a lot less than they would a Maltese worker.
There is a lot of fear because immigrants are dark-skinned. When people from ex-Yugoslavia were coming in, there were as many people taking the jobs of the Maltese but because they were not black, and they did not look that different, people were less scared of them.
Multiculturalism is inevitable. But here it is happening in the worst of ways.
Europe is not moving forward enough into high tech because it prefers protectionism rather than migrant workers.
This is a very short-sighted solution in a globalised economy because if migrants do not take low paid jobs and the Maltese move up to high tech ones, China and India will take our low tech jobs away, anyway. For fear of Nazi retrospections, multiculturalism in Europe is taking the form of "rejection of all" rather than "acceptance of all".
This could be seen in the banishing of signs of religious affiliation in French schools, which understandably resulted in backlashes from people who feel that a minority culture is overriding the majority one.
The arguments put forward that immigrants carry contagious diseases are often fallacious. Immigrants who are coming from certain parts of the world will undoubtedly have a higher risk of certain diseases. The issue is how many of these diseases are infective.
If a person infected with malaria comes to Malta, it will not be transmitted to others because the mosquito which transmits the disease does not thrive here. It's not a problem that they have malaria except for the fact that they might increase the strain on our public health resources.
Immigrants hailing from sub-Saharan Africa may have a slightly increased risk of HIV. But unless you happen to go around sleeping with them or share drugs with them, it's not a problem.
The risk of people getting diseases in the immigrants' countries of origin comes from poor hygienic conditions such as drinking contaminated water but the immigrants cannot be said to be "carrying such diseases".
Paul Clough, head of the Anthropology Division.
Demonstrations are a great thing in a democracy. They show citizens the real strength - and character - of all political movements. I was told that about 700 people were at the ANR demo. That shows how small is the ANR. I also read about the violence at the demo. That shows the real character of the ANR.
Who is Philip Beattie fooling? According to The Times he said that his appeal was "sincere... against racial hatred". But then, he said that "we just don't want to become the toilet of the Mediterranean"!
He warned the crowd to steer away from violence. But then, demonstrators pushed a priest off a column of the old opera house! He said: "We should not hate the immigrants..." But then, demonstrators carried banners calling for Solidarity With Our Police And Army! Is it not true that some soldiers are being investigated for violence at a detention centre?
The people of Malta will not judge Philip Beattie just by his words. They will also judge him by the actions of demonstrators.
The Maltese people have been "economic refugees" in many countries. They have accepted white "economic refugees" from Eastern Europe into Malta. They can decide whether or not the anger of the ANR is against black people. The issue is racism.
The great majority of Maltese citizens are fantastically tolerant and politically articulate. Those are the real "Maltese roots". Many Maltese love Africans. Many more are happy to do business with them. The people of Malta are not fooled by Philip Beattie.
Fr Paul Pace, Jesuit, lecturer in the Department of Moral Theology, and acting director of the Jesuit Refugee Service (Malta).
I think the whole argument of ANR is built on a mistaken premise, that there is a group advocating "unrestricted and clandestine immigration".
With regard to the article written by Philip Beattie in The Sunday Times (October 2) I know of no group that advocates such an irresponsible position and it seems that neither does the author for he speaks in very vague terms of "leftist elements which have infiltrated the local Catholic Church, the liberal-leftist clique, immigrationists".
I understand the debate as being about procedures to identify those persons who have a right to protection from those who have not, the alleged harshness of the detention policy and the quality of protection to be given.
The unfortunate option of the local Church not to get involved in the debate about irregular migration could only lead to such pseudo-interpretations of Christianity.
It is certainly a travesty of the Church's social teaching to pit the common good against human rights, including the right to protection. Pope John XXIII said very clearly that "It is generally accepted today that the common good is best safeguarded when personal rights and duties are guaranteed.
"The chief concern of civil authorities must therefore be to ensure that these rights are recognised, respected, co-ordinated, defended and promoted and that each individual is enabled to perform his duties more easily" (Pacem in Terris, 60).
Joe Friggieri, head of the Philosophy Department.
Instead of showing compassion and mercy in the face of human suffering, the New Christian Right sees the plight of so many African men, women and children landing on these shores as a threat to our national identity, religious traditions, cultural patrimony, European and Christian heritage, etc.
It prefers to mouth platitudes about what it describes as "the country's collective peace of mind and social/moral well-being", rather than suggesting ways and means whereby the poor and oppressed can be helped.
The victims of injustice are portrayed as aggressors and those who try to reach out to them are accused of promoting indiscriminate immigration.
When facts are misrepresented and truth distorted in this way, it becomes extremely hard to argue or engage in meaningful debate.
This doesn't mean that the views of the New Christian Right aren't harmful or dangerous, especially with the gullible.
Philip Beattie, lecturer in banking and finance and ANR's national secretary.
In a recent column you had spoken of a group of liberals advocating "unrestricted and clandestine immigration". Which group were you referring to exactly?
There is not a single organised group advocating these beliefs. Or rather, as far as I know, there is no such group. However, there are many liberal leftists posted in different media who are the exponents of such beliefs.
In view of the incidents between ANR followers and members of the Graffiti movement and Fr Mark Montebello during the protest march in Valletta on October 3 some commentators said that, despite your calls for solidarity and anti-racism, violence was the real face of ANR. What are your comments?
We made it clear we did not want racists at the demonstration. If a couple of crackpots and hot heads turned up for the protest, they should not be linked to us. Any violence should be condemned. In any case, however, Fr Montebello should not have provoked the crowd. I do not expect a priest, who should give an example of prudence and temperance, to be provocative in that way. If I were to go to a Labour Party meeting with a Nationalist Party flag, wouldn't I be provoking? From the picture I saw on newspapers the day after the protest, there were more than 10 people with Fr Montebello. If they did not have a permit, they were breaking the law.
ANR spoke of Maltese identity, culture and integrity. Does ANR see Maltese society as homogeneous? What constitutes Maltese identity?
Traditions and values which have formed Maltese society as it is today constitutes our identity. Our surnames show that the Maltese come from different countries, ethnicities and cultural backgrounds, yet there are some factors which unite us. We have no problem with those who were not born here but who genuinely integrated into Maltese society. What we do not want is someone like Adel Smith in Italy who wanted to see crucifixes removed from classrooms. We have no problem with foreigners who have been naturalised, are paying taxes and observing laws. We are against the silent invasion of illegal immigrants from Africa and from Eastern Europe.
What do you make of the support of right wing groups in Malta? Don't you think that immigration is being used as a pretext for hatred and exclusion of minorities in society?
The Nazis used immigration as an excuse to eliminate all minorities. We condemn that wholeheartedly. The right wing is multi-faceted and we, as ANR, do not want to be associated with extremists. Everyone has fundamental rights which are acknowledged internationally and these should be respected. But we have to distinguish between real rights and fictitious rights. We are speaking out of common sense and not out of hatred. We do not want that to happen.
Ruth Farrugia, lecturer at the Faculty of Law.
Human rights are rights we hold to be inalienable and belonging to all humans according to natural law. Without these rights, we cannot be assured of freedom and a "reasonable" quality of life.
In Malta, we are increasingly conscious of human rights enforcement and vociferous in our attempts to ensure effective access to them.
In this context, my reaction to recent events is one of shocked incredulity. In some quarters, human rights are being perceived as a privilege to be accorded at discretion, applicable primarily or only to nationals.
The reason vaunted for this is largely founded in the bid to maintain our cultural identity.
But surely this identity includes a basic belief in human rights founded in natural law and Christian beliefs. Discriminatory treatment of people of a different race, colour or creed is against the law and should be morally unacceptable to us all.
"Illegal immigration" is undoubtedly a cause for concern but irregular entry into Malta is frequently the only means of access to protection for asylum seekers. It is being suggested that because of the large number of applicants and the hunch that they are economic migrants anyway, we should forget about rights and send them all back.
While it is true that a number of asylum seekers do not have grounds to be given refugee or humanitarian status, the Refugee Commissioner decides that more than half the applicants do. There is no question that people who are found not to qualify for asylum should be returned, but this must be done expeditiously.
At present, we have large numbers of people who have been rejected at both stages and who have been released into the community following long months of detention with no rights and no hope of moving on. This is an issue which must also be addressed within a human rights perspective.
Hysterical demands call for automatic repatriation to Libya. Are they honestly proposing that bona fide asylum seekers be denied their right to protection? Is this a show of confidence in Libya's human rights record?
Most asylum seekers I speak to are not happy to be in Malta. At the first opportunity, those entitled to a travel document leave Malta for mainland Europe where their chances of integration are substantially greater. Since 2003, nearly 900 such people have left Malta and this does not take into account the numbers who were deported. How does this reflect on us?
We have an obligation to defend human rights, whatever the cost - "Ask not for whom the bell tolls..."