Lawmakers should consider introducing a special warrant for lawyers to practise in the Family Court to ensure they were trained to deal with the sensitive nature of the cases, Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano said yesterday.
The time had also come to implement some form of quality assurance system to monitor the work carried out by mediators in separation cases, he said.
The Chief Justice was speaking about families in the law courts during a conference organised by the International Commission on Couple and Family Relations (ICCFR) and the Cana Movement.
The conference, entitled Emp-owering Families As Sustainable Partners In Social Policy, brought together academics from various countries.
The Chief Justice explained that the bulk of cases before the Family Court concerned separation and annulment.
Since mediation was introduced, in 2003, a couple seeking separation had first to appear in front of a mediator before going for litigation. The mediator tried to reconcile the couple or work out an amicable separation. If the case moved on to litigation, the tension in the courtroom was often palpable.
"The situation is not made easier when lawyers use inflammatory language to make some point or refer to the opposing party in very uncomplimentary terms," the Chief Justice said.
When children were involved, all too often they were used as pawns by their parents "and sometimes, unfortunately, even by insensitive lawyers".
"Perhaps it's about time that... the legislator considers whether a special warrant should be introduced for advocates to practise in the family section of the Civil Courts. Such a warrant would be granted only after the advocates undergo special training... in matrimonial litigation and the warrant will be subject to renewal every so many years."
The Chief Justice explained that while judges' work could be accessed, because the cases were open to the public, mediation took place in a room where only the parties, their lawyers and the mediator were present. "I would like to see some sort of quality assurance undertaken of the work of the mediators," he said.
He concluded by pointing out that families who ended up in court obviously had problems to solve. This reality could not be ignored. However, there was also the reality of families founded on a stable marriage who never made the headlines. Society owed a great deal to these families who may not be out there campaigning for rights, sending letters to newspapers or writing comments on blogs.
"And, please, don't mention blogs to me at the moment," he said in an obvious reference to the blog of columnist Daphne Caruana Galizia who stands charged with defaming Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera through a series of entries.
In his opening speech, Cana director Fr Joseph Mizzi spoke about the importance of empowering families "to be catalysts in policy-making".
"Whenever policies are being discussed, they should he subjected to a family impact assessment just like planning projects are subjected to an environment impact assessment," he said.
Policies on taxation, social benefits, housing, inheritance and work should go through this assessment by consulting with family representatives within civil society, he said.
ICCFR chairman Terry Prendergast stressed it was important that families spoke up about issues that concerned them so these would be reflected in policies.
He gave the example of cohabitating couples, who followed the family model but did not fall under the traditional description of family.
Unfortunately, he said, these couples were not easy to pin down because they did not make their voice heard much. Yet, as these couples increased in number, it was important they spoke up to shape polices that might affect them.