Editorial

Norman Lowell is dark skinned. He may not think he is, but if he emigrated to Australia tomorrow some people would probably call him a 'wog'. And if he decided to live in the UK, some could well call him a 'Paki'.

Neither of these is a pleasant term. But ask many Maltese migrants who left their homeland for one of these countries, and they will tell you that they have lived this experience.

Because, to varying degrees, they tend to be darker than the fair-skinned 'natives'. They also speak English with an unfamiliar accent and have taken jobs that others think should be theirs. This has inevitably made them targets.

Yet many stuck it out. Particularly where they did not colonise, they adapted to life abroad. Many had children who were more something else than Maltese, and gradually they were accepted; respected even. But they never forgot their roots, their customs or their homeland. Especially not their homeland.

When The Sunday Times ran an interview with Ahmed Bugri last week, a Ghanaian who has been living in Malta for 18 years, the comment section on the timesofmalta.com website was filled with racist sentiment. Because some of us seem to be more impressed by a Youtube clip purportedly showing Muammar Gaddafi claiming that Europe will become a Muslim continent than we are with the fact that these are human beings like us who leave their homeland.

Yet something strange is happening. Not a single black migrant landed on our shores last month. In fact, only two boats containing illegal immigrants have arrived in Malta since February. This is cause for celebration, is it not?

It could be. But we would only really know the answer to this question if we get to the bottom of the mysterious 'why'.

We know that Italy has been trying to commit Libya to cooperate in the repatriation of African immigrants who have been crossing the Mediterranean after leaving from Libyan shores. And we know that the two countries set up joint naval patrols to turn back immigrants.

What we are not really sure about - though one could easily make an educated guess - is if legitimate asylum seekers' human rights are being respected. It is noteworthy that the Council of Europe's Human Rights Commissioner, the Vatican, the UN Refugee Agency and Human Rights Watch have all said this is practically impossible.

It is also evident that unless asylum seekers have given up their quest to reach Europe, Libya has tackled the problem at source. The problem is that nobody knows, or is saying, what is really going on.

Our government is adopting a cautious approach, knowing that the crackdown has benefitted Malta. And Europe has been conspicuous by its silence, which reinforces the accusation that the EU sometimes disregards notions of human rights and solidarity, provided they are not being breached in its own back yard.

Tripoli has not signed the Geneva Convention for Refugees, which means the UNHCR is not allowed access to its immigrant detention camps and holding centres. While its spokesman, Laura Boldrini, said she feared the crackdown posed an added danger to genuine asylum seekers who might now be forced to choose even more treacherous routes to reach Europe from Africa.

Some Maltese may not care about that. But it may bother them to know that unless the agreement with Libya is above board, it is unlikely to be effective or to last.