Lost for strategy

From sin to referendum, the divorce debate has shifted, leaving a list of questions in its wake. Kurt Sansone seeks some answers from political analysts.

A proposal to hold a referendum to endorse divorce legislation that would have already been approved by Parliament could help muster more support from the government’s backbench, according to a former Nationalist minister.

“There does not seem to be a clear majority in Parliament for Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s divorce Bill, but if the entry into force of divorce is made subject to approval by a referendum it will increase the chances of having more MPs on the Nationalist side voting for divorce,” Michael Falzon said.

His comments come in the same week when seven influential priests, endorsed by the Curia, put the lid over the sin issue and the debate shifted to the method of how divorce legislation should be approved.

The referendum option was floated more forcefully by Dr Pullicino Orlando, who said the Prime Minister himself had expressed such a wish in a meeting this week.

It is not yet clear what exactly was discussed by Lawrence Gonzi and Dr Pullicino Orlando and while the backbencher said the Prime Minister promised a parliamentary debate and a referendum next year, Dr Gonzi toned down the declaration, urging people not to speak of referenda yet.

Mr Falzon is against the holding of a divorce referendum but believes it could solve the concerns of those MPs who argue no party has a mandate to introduce divorce.

“Procedurally, I do not foresee any problems if Parliament votes on a divorce Bill that would include a clause saying that its entry into force would only come about after a positive referendum result. Many laws are approved and their entry into force is subject to a legal notice issued by the minister. The same principle can apply,” Mr Falzon said, disagreeing with President Emeritus Eddie Fenech Adami’s position that holding a referendum to endorse a divorce law approved by Parliament was “almost unconstitutional”.

This week’s events have left people wondering whether this was the result of a government strategy to take the divorce debate under its wing and deprive the Labour Party of a political plank come the next election.

Mr Falzon believes this is the case but opinion on the matter is divided.

“This week’s events seem to indicate that the Prime Minister wants the divorce issue out of the way before the general election and, strategically, he is right to adopt this stance because, either way the referendum goes, it would rob Joseph Muscat of a political platform in the next election,” Mr Falzon said, insisting Dr Pullicino Orlando was wrong to anticipate the Prime Minister.

However, the issue is not as simple, according to historian and former Labour Party general secretary Dominic Fenech.

He believes Dr Gonzi is undecided on the matter and, if it were up to him, the divorce issue was never raised.

“The Nationalist Party may try to do something as a token, knowing full well that it will lead nowhere but it would be enough to pull the rug beneath Joseph Muscat’s feet. However, we could be reading too much into the story,” Prof. Fenech said.

Dr Pullicino Orlando’s an­nouncement this week after meeting the Prime Minister, he added, was another indication there was no perfect strategy in place.

“Jeffrey jumped the gun by making the announcement rather than the Prime Minister. It seemed to me the Prime Minister came out looking bad from the situation,” Prof. Fenech said.

With the major political parties having no official stand on divorce, Prof. Fenech believes both are making calculations as to how many votes divorce will lose or win them.

“Despite the debate, it is still a long way before divorce becomes legal. Nobody is offering proper leadership on the issue. Joseph Muscat took the initiative but his is a qualified approach because it speaks of a Private Member’s Bill and a free vote,” he added, admitting, though, that despite all of Dr Muscat’s qualifications, his position was more straightforward than the Nationalist Party’s internal confusion.

Whether a divorce referendum will be held next year remains unclear, but for former Labour minister Joe Micallef Stafrace it could be a good strategy.

“As long as the public is faced with an honest question about a specific Bill, the referendum is a good strategy. I believe the issue has to be decided on its own merits, avoiding a situation that splits the country into sinners and believers,” Dr Micallef Stafrace said.

The paper by the seven priests, he added, provided a good guide and posited some interesting reflections that steered clear from the mistakes of the political-religious battle of the 1960s.

“A lot is being said about how bad it would be for us if divorce is introduced but we have no proof that in a country without divorce the situation is any better,” he said, insisting that people should be well-informed before a referendum.

The outcome of a referendum is conditioned among others by the type of information available to the public, but for Mr Falzon it also depends on what profile the Prime Minister will adopt during the campaign.

ksansone@timesofmalta.com