George Swindells writes:
I hope you do not mind me writing to you with this question, but you are one of the very few that I and others seem to get frank answers from.

In The Times I read the article regarding a meeting in Gozo about the Ta' Cenc project. The point that intrigued me was the comment about what seems to be discrimination creeping into our society regarding non-Maltese-speaking residents or citizens.

The Times reported that at one stage an argument broke out on whether people should speak only in Maltese when one person was putting his questions in English.

I should like to know how English-speaking citizens of this country stand. Are we heading for a double standard when one of the main reasons Malta is attractive to foreign companies investing here is because of the English language being the official second language?

And we also brag about the large influx of foreign students who come here to learn English, not Maltese.

I should like to know how we stand with regards to our rights not to be discriminated against because we do not speak Maltese both as far as the Maltese Constitution and EU discrimination laws are concerned.

I am English married to a Maltese with dual citizenship. Just as many Maltese expatriates in Australia who now have a right to a dual citizenship but in the majority of cases would not be able to speak Maltese.

This is a sensitive issue and I would not be surprised if this question sparks a new round of exchanges in this paper on the language question.

At the outset, there is no case of discrimination here under EU law since the question of which language should be a national, official or working language in an EU country is not within the competence of the EU. It is up to each individual country to determine its language choices.

We all know that the European Union is based on diversity, including language diversity. So much so that there are 23 official languages in the EU, including Maltese, at a very high cost.

So the last thing the EU would do is tell us which language or languages we should use.

One must therefore determine how this matter is regulated at national level.

Article 5 of the Constitution of Malta deals with the issue of languages to be used in Malta. It states that "the National language of Malta is the Maltese language".

However it goes on to add that "the Maltese and the English languages and such other language as may be prescribed by Parliament (by a law passed by not less than two-thirds of all the members of the House of Representatives) shall be the official languages of Malta."

It adds further that "the Administration may for all official purposes use any of such languages: Provided that any person may address the Administration in any of the official languages and the reply of the Administration thereto shall be in such language".

Moreover, "the language of the Courts shall be the Maltese language: Provided that Parliament may make such provision for the use of the English language in such cases and under such conditions as it may prescribe".

And "the House of Representatives may, in regulating its own procedure, determine the language or languages that shall be used in Parliamentary proceedings and records".

So whereas Maltese is the national language, both Maltese and English are official languages. This is a firmly established rule which has steadily transformed us into a bilingual society.

Just consider. Laws are published in both languages. The best-selling newspaper is an English-language paper. People often prefer to speak in Maltese but write in English. Inversely, many are weak at speaking English and much weaker still at writing Maltese. The vast majority of families speak in Maltese at home, but many speak English. Many Maltese also often switch from one language to the other in the same conversation. And so on.

What this tells me is that in this country we have made a clear choice for two official languages. And we should respect it. This is not to say that we are very good at both languages, even though we should be. But that is besides the point.

So from the provisions of the Constitution, it is clear that whereas the administration may use any of the two official languages in its work, in addressing the administration, a person may use either Maltese or English and get a reply in that language.

In practice, difficulties may arise in public meetings where Maltese is used and the meeting is attended by non-Maltese participants. I would say that the difficulties are more practical than legal in nature.

On the one hand, it is perfectly normal for such meetings to be conducted in Maltese since Maltese is widely spoken by the vast majority of Maltese people in their daily lives. This is different from say, Ireland, where only a minority speak Irish (Gaelic) even though from this year this has become the 23rd official language of the Union.

Or in Belgium, where both French and Dutch are official languages. But the French-speaking south is unable to speak Dutch whereas the Dutch-speaking Flanders in the north has serious difficulties with French.

In Malta, many native Maltese speakers who do not have any reason to speak English in their daily lives are not entirely confident in expressing themselves in English and they should not be made to feel uncomfortable. So simply switching to English may well be courteous but sometimes it tends to put some people in an uncomfortable position which they may be reluctant to point out.

On the other hand, English-speaking Maltese citizens and expatriates should also have access to public meetings and be able to listen and express themselves in English. After all, English is also an official language in this country.

What to do?

Perhaps in public meetings of a sensitive nature, such as the one referred to by the reader, the authorities ought to be prepared for the possibility of such situations and have a person at hand who is qualified to provide interpretation upon request. It need not be the elaborate and costly simultaneous interpretation services that we have in EU institutions. But it must nevertheless be sufficient so as to remove any potential or perceived discomfort or disadvantage of non-Maltese and non-English-speaking participants.

Ultimately this all boils down to one simple point. No law or administrative measure should be imposed on a citizen unless it is in a language that he or she understands. In a society like ours that has opted for two languages, the authorities must play safe and be prepared to use both.

This is a minimum standard of civil rights that ought to be respected.

Readers who would like to ask questions to be answered in this column can send an e-mail, identifying themselves, to contact@simonbusuttil.eu or through www.simonbusuttil.eu