Divorce is about upholding order

The divorce issue is not whether divorce per se strengthens the institution of the family but whether the lack of divorce is undermining the very concept of the “family” and order in our society.

In an interview carried in In-Nazzjon over 17 years ago – in July 1993 when I was a Cabinet member in Eddie Fenech Adami’s second Administration – I was asked by Georg Sapiano for my personal opinion on the divorce issue. Looking back at my reply, I find that what I had said then holds also for the present.

I had argued the Nationalist Party was then against introducing divorce because it felt the harm done to society by this introduction eclipsed the harm resulting from the suffering of a few individuals for whom it was obvious that divorce was the only real solution to their personal problems. I added, however, that Maltese society was evolving in such a way this situation would eventually no longer prevail and we were heading towards a scenario where the harm done as a result of the lack of divorce would eventually be bigger than the harm done to society by its introduction. Applying the principle of the lesser of two evils would then militate in favour of introducing divorce.

Is the concept of the family in Malta stronger with numerous couples that live together and have children but cannot marry than if these couples were allowed to marry as a result of a divorce law?

With regard to the PN’s beliefs and values, it is a secular and not a confessional political party. Upholding Christian-Democrat political principles is not tantamount to upholding Canon law as the law of the land. Moreover, Christian values – that, in political terms, uphold the dignity of the individual – are not the equivalent of the precepts and tenets of the Catholic Church. The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, is leader of the Christian Democrat Union (CDU) in Germany. She is in her second marriage after a divorce.

I strongly hold that if the state withholds the introduction of divorce it should not do so on grounds of religious belief. The state must look at the issue from its own perspective and this means in consideration of its obligation to ensure order in our society. Whether divorce should be introduced or not depends on the impact it would have on the order in our society. If the present situation is such that the lack of divorce is leading to social disorder, then the state is obliged to introduce divorce. I believe the number of cohabiting couples forming legally unrecognised family units has increased to the extent that this phenomenon must be regulated so that there is order in society.

Consider the case of couples who are cohabiting and having children of their own outside wedlock because one (or both) partner is separated having been married previously. What does the possibility of remarrying civilly – after “erasing” the original marriage via a divorce decree – mean in practical terms for these couples? From the state’s “order in society” point of view, it means a lot. From the moral point of view, I do not think the divorce option makes matters worse.

It is relevant to point out that even Archbishop Paul Cremona has gone on record asserting the Church is not accountable for order in society as this is the sole responsibility of the state. The logical implications of this assertion are obvious.

I believe today we have reached the stage where the absence of divorce is proving more harmful than its introduction, in the sense that the lack of divorce is leading to a substantial number of new “family” units that are unregulated because one or both partners cannot remarry. In my opinion, the social disorder that this situation is causing should no longer be considered acceptable.

Moreover, these couples should be able to claim the recognition and stability that marriage gives them when forming a new family. I argue that not only should they be civilly married if they so wish but that, in the present circumstances, it is in the state’s interest, as well as its duty, to give them the right to remarry.

It would be tragic for our political class to be cynical and calculating in the debate about something so fundamental as marriage and civil divorce. It is very tempting for politicians to manipulate important debates to draw fleeting political advantage but falling for this temptation in this particular circumstance is tantamount to failing the nation.

Opting for a cohabitation law to regulate relationships between couples who wish to remarry but cannot because there is no divorce legislation will not strengthen the institution of marriage or the family. In fact, I reckon it will weaken both.

micfal@maltanet.net