Hail to the chief

The MLP contest is becoming more bizarre by the minute. It seems that somebody thought that George Abela's leadership ambitions could be traded in exchange for a promise that the party would nominate him to become President of the Republic when Eddie Fenech Adami's term is up.

Just as an aside, did I miss something? Since when does the opposition party nominate the President?

As far as I can remember, though I wouldn't bank on my memory, creeping old age being what it is, there's never been an occasion when the Presidency was filled on the suggestion of the opposition, though it is true that the MLP seems to think it has some sort of claim to do this because every time they're in opposition they whinge and whine about how this should be the case.

But back to the main thrust of this segment, a couple of questions arise.

Firstly, how naïve is the fool who made this suggestion to Dr Abela? Does he (the fool) really think that someone who is ready to commit himself to the rough and tumble of the political game would chuck his towel in for an outside chance of being appointed to the mainly ceremonial role of President? Just how little does this fool know his subject?

Secondly, by what criteria does this person (the fool) arrogate to himself and, by extension, to the MLP, the right to barter an Office of State with the (relatively) sordid position of party leader?

It is symptomatic of the current MLP machine that even an obviously faulty cog in it has this cavalier attitude to what is seemly. The important thing is, clearly, to position the various pawns properly to protect the precious principles previously proven to have primary importance in promoting the pretensions of the chosen few.

After all, it is emerging more clearly by the minute that everything is being done to wreak PR disasters over Dr Abela's candidacy. The elves had no compunctions about uprooting that rapidly deteriorating fossil, Dom Mintoff, and planting him, blinking uncomprehendingly, in the audience last weekend.

The Chelsea game is about to start, so this stuff will probably get even less coherent than usual, incidentally.

The spectacle of Mr Mintoff raving about how the police had stuck a GPS-tracker in his hearing aid can't have helped Dr Abela's image as someone who could drag the MLP into acceptability with the voter, which in itself demonstrates the cynicism of the manipulators.

And then these people can't understand why people don't trust them enough to vote for them.

Nip it in the bud

I won't, of course, comment about the case that's made the news of late, since before the facts are established, it would be manifestly wrong to do so.

However, it is a reality that the public perception of the police has already been compromised by the mere fact that allegations have been made and inquiries initiated. This does not, obviously, mean that the negative perception is in any way, shape or form justified.

We have, however, to deal in realities and the current reality has to be tackled by the Commissioner of Police quickly and decisively. The force has dragged itself out of the quagmire into which it had descended in the late 1970s/early 1980s and it would be a shame if we again started looking at the police as agents of danger rather than guardians of our well-being.

Now is the time for positive action to be taken to ensure that even the slightest shadow of suspicion is banished.

The bright light of truth, if you'll forgive the hyperbole, has to be shone into all the relevant corners, to make sure there's nothing sinister skulking in the shadows.

It's also about time to revisit the idea that people "helping the police with their enquiries" are given the right to be accompanied by a lawyer of their choice.

This provision is already in the law and it seems that the cops themselves are not exactly against it, since it protects them too, but they want a quid pro quo, in the form of a dilution of the right to silence.

In essence, what is being mooted is the idea that if you're lawyered-up when the fuzz is having words with you, you can't keep shtum and then come up with some fancy pants defence later.

Shut up, JPO?

The MLP spinners never fail to astound me with their sheer cheek.

Recently, they (the spinners) came out with the rather farcical idea that Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando should keep quiet and let them spread all manner of muck about him without responding. Exactly what they expect him to do is unclear: Do they think that he's going to sit back and let all their remarks roll over him, purring contentedly?

I, for one, am not going to cast judgement on JPO until all the facts are in. Over the weeks just following Labour's third (or was it fourth?) defeat in a row, everyone and her husband was busy laying down the law about what he should and shouldn't do, whether he should resign, be fired, be knighted or be beknighted and, quite frankly, it's all been so much hot air.

Labour's apologists, unable or unwilling to accept that they've lost the election (again), have been chuntering on about Mistragate for all the world as if they were trying out for a revival of the much-loved "Cry Wolf" musical so loved of political campaigners the world over. This has led them into adopting the ridiculous position that JPO should turn the other cheek and smile while he's at it.

And the diver, Drogba, Didier of that ilk, gives his own reply to Benitez by slotting home a brilliant one.

imbocca@gmail.com, www.timesofmalta.com/blogs