Yvonne Arqueros Ebejer
Made in Malta for foreigners
Legislation on divorce is found all over the world with the exception of the Vatican City, the Philippines, Andorra and Malta. Interesting to note is that, even though divorce is not part of the Maltese legal system, by virtue of article 33 of the Marriage Act (Chapter 255, Laws of Malta) a foreign divorce may be registered at the Annotations Section of the Public Registry. Moreover, it is interesting to note that the head of state at the Vatican is the Pope while the head of state of Andorra is the bishop.
In Malta, divorce is applicable to the chosen few. To those who have resided or theoretically resided abroad or who had foreign spouses. This anomaly has been going on for years and years and it has been accepted without any great commotion or upheavals by anti-divorce Maltese legislators or anti-divorce movements.
The obvious question is if a number of anti-divorce Maltese politicians, political parties and even the Catholic Church are strongly against the introduction of the legislation of divorce why are they immune to those divorces acquired from abroad and which are allowed to be registered in our Public Registry without any resistance? If something is considered immoral and wrong why should it be accepted when attained from a foreign country or if obtained by a small number of people? How is the common good being affected by these foreign divorces? Or is it all a matter of who manages to wield absolute power?
In view of the fact that the two political parties in Parliament have refrained obdurately from dealing with the divorce issue in the House and the divorce debate is still going around in circles, it was comfortably decided that the issue should be determined by a referendum even though Malta does not hold the referenda culture so much at heart, so much so that in the past 140 years it only held five referenda.
A referendum is quite a powerful, political, democratic instrument, which gives the electorate the opportunity to either accept or refute a particular issue. It is usually an issue of national interest and which would influence the lives of all citizens, irrespective of their beliefs, like Malta’s accession to the EU or the Lisbon Treaty.
Next month, Maltese citizens will be asked to cast their vote in a referendum in favour of or against the introduction of divorce legislation because most members of Parliament have adamantly chosen to do like Pontius Pilate and wash their hands off their responsibility. They preferred that this right, which affects only a small percentage of Maltese society and EU citizens residing in Malta, is decided through a referendum. Indeed, it will only affect a small minority and, therefore, is it necessary, just and fair that such legislation is decided by a referendum?
It seems that certain political parties allow rights to be renounced for fear of losing votes from people who cannot distinguish between state and Church and in fear of the backlash of the Roman Catholic Church itself. Religious faiths should always be respected but in a secular democracy laws should not be dictated or influenced by any religion.
Malta needs divorce legislation so that a number of individuals are not denied the right to choose how to live their lives as they so desire. But there has been an obvious perpetual lack of real political commitment on the part of certain political parties on this matter. Whether political parties agree or disagree with the dissolution of marriages, they should not deprive a group of their electorate from having divorce legislation because they will be condemning them to a terrestrial limbo and imprisoning them in a legal vacuum. Divorce is not only the dissolution of a failed marriage but the acceptance and coming to terms with that failure. It is a painful procedure but an indispensable one to move on in life.
It was Alternattiva Demokratika – the Green party that has set the ball rolling for divorce legislation when they presented the Irish and Italian divorce legislation to all the members of the Maltese Parliament in June 2010 after having included this proposal in all their electoral manifestos since 1989. They did so because Malta is a supposedly liberal and representative democracy, which is made up of a secular and pluralistic society.
The most important characteristic of any democracy will always be the majority rule but individual rights and liberties should always be protected by a responsible, compassionate and intelligent government. A number of citizens could suffer through absolute domination of the majority and ignoring the needs of a particular group of people is one of the biggest coercions in any democracy.
May 28, 2011 will be an important date for Malta. It could mark the beginning of the Maltese enlightenment with regard to the respect of basic civil rights. I will vote yes. What about you?
The author is deputy chairman and spokesman for civil rights of Alternattiva Demokratika – the Green party.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
22 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Michael Sciortino
Apr 30th 2011, 13:38
Ms. Arqueros Ebejer
You are not precise in what you write because the Vatican does allow for the dissolution of valid marriages under the Pauline and Petrine privileges. This is something that the state of Malta cannot do.
As everybody knows divorce is the dissolution of marriage, yet the Church has the power to grant such dissolutions under the said 'privileges'.
Mr Carmelo Micallef
Apr 30th 2011, 12:12
As is sadly common in our society that a debate takes the form of purveyors of hate spitting insults at each other.
PS There is a reasoned contribution to this debate in the replies below from Germany
Mr Joe Zammit
Apr 30th 2011, 10:32
BORG IN-NADUR: 17 ta' Novembru, 2010:
Uliedi, illejla tajtkom prova ċara. Iva wliedi, għalhekk Ibni Ġesù qed jibgħatni hawn, fuq dil-gżira. Għalhekk għażilt dil-familja kważi ħames snin ilu. Għalhekk ridt lil Angelik u lil Catherine. Iva wliedi, Ibni Ġesù ma riedx jara żwieġ imfarrak. Għalhekk ħames snin ilu bagħatni hawnhekk, nerġa’ ngħidilkom. Ġejt inħabbrilkom minn qabel x’se jseħħ fuq dil-gżira. Kien hawn min fehemni u oħrajn lanqas biss taw widen.
Ftit taż-żmien ieħor se jkollkom għażla f’idejkom intom stess. Oqogħdu attenti x’tagħżlu wliedi. Iġġibux il-gwaj fuqkom.
Fejnhom fil-familji l-imħabba, l-għaqda, il-maħfra, is-sinċerità u t-talb flimkien? Fejnhom? Għalhekk illum kulħadd qed ifarfar minn fuq spallejh mal-ewwel intopp li jinqala’.
Iva wliedi, il-qalb tiegħi u l-qalb ta’ Ibni Ġesù muġugħin minħabba fikom. Jiena muġugħa għax jiena omm li nħoss għalikom.
Akkost ta’ kollox uliedi, jiġri x’jiġri, ibqgħu għidu: “LE GHAD-DIVORZJU, LE GHAD-DIVORZJU!"
U għidu r-rużarju u ġiegħlu lil ħaddieħor jgħid ir-rużarju.
Grazzi talli smajtu s-sejħa tiegħi.
Mr Daniel Schembri
Apr 30th 2011, 16:38
Joe...
you can't force anyone to believe or tho change his mind
there's no such think as 'gieghlu lil haddihor jghid ir ruzarju'.
Very Christian of you...forcing and imposing.
If hell was real, you'll be the first to bake in it.
Mr Lawrence Fenech
Apr 30th 2011, 08:15
@Saliba.
Although I wsh the rolyal couple a thousand years of happy marriage the polls are 7 to 8 years.
Mr Alfred Grech
Apr 30th 2011, 04:20
Yvonne, I liked your write up but you ruined it when you attempted to give credit to the AD. Handling such topics one has to be neutral or impartial. Otherwise, you get thumbs up.
Mr Lawrence Andrews
Apr 30th 2011, 00:44
"a compassionate government" there is no room for compassion in Malta. Yvonne, The Maltese are Catholics not Christians! Parliamentarians in Malta are scared stiff about this and dread getting into a pickle so over to the people and the Catholics, ie the majority will decide....against divorce of course and the right honourable gentlemen and few ladies too will come clean leaving those who most need a hand out in the cold. Now that's Catholic!
Mr Tony Camilleri
Apr 30th 2011, 11:13
Mr joseph saliba haven't you heard that William and Kate have already signed a contract on what Kate would get if they divorce? Go find it on the BBC.
Mr joseph saliba
Apr 29th 2011, 19:33
Today I watched the marriage ceremony(?) of Prince William to Catherine. I heard them promise each other and God an everlasting bond... Meditating on the present issue of divorce... The problem with divorcists is marriage. Divorce is like a licence to go back on your promise. Believe me or not I am not voting in the coming referendum. I am leaving it to the politicians. It is so difficult to decide.
Mr Romeo Busuttil
Apr 30th 2011, 10:44
Exactly Mr Saliba, " I heard them promise each other and God an everlasting bond". They promised to god because they were married in church. The problem with the anti-divorce movement is that they are simply unable to distinguish between a religious and civil marriage. I was married with just a civil ceremony and not in church. Who are these people to deny me the right to divorce should I need it? Who are they to impose their religious beliefs on others who do not share them? Divorce should be there available for everyone, than those who feel that its not for him beacusse it goes against their religious beliefs have the right to simply not use it just as all the rest have the right to use it should they wish to. By the way, I am happily married however I do not believe that others who are less fortunate than me should be discriminated against. This is what all those who are not blinded by religion should meditate about. This is why I will vote yes.
Mr Kurt Waschnig
Apr 29th 2011, 16:38
I have been following this debate for a long time in the Times of Malta. As a foreigner is it very difficult to understand why the debate and discussions are full of passion and even mixed with hatred.
Malta is a stable democracy and belongs to The European Union. Universal human rights and civil rights are applied and protected in liberal democracies.
Legislation on divorce is found all over the world with the exception of the Vatican City, the Philippines, Andorra and Malta as this article says.
It is usual and a legal right to get divorced in Germany if a marriage cannot be saved.
Every human being must have the constitutional and legal right to get divorced.
In May Maltese citizens will be asked to cast their vote in a referendum in favour of or against the introduction of divorce legislation.
I hope there will be a majority for the legal right to decide by individuals whether to get divorced or not. If there is a majority for divorce a bill should be figured out and passed in parliament and applied in Malta.
These procedures belong to a working democracy.
Best regards
Kurt Waschnig Oldenburg Germany
Mr Alfred Hili
Apr 29th 2011, 16:02
I don't think the referendum is the right way to go.
True Catholic believers will have to vote against. Others have a choice; they could vote for or against.
Usually, it's parliament that decides on civil rights. Parliament represents the whole population; both believers and non believers.
Mr Lawrence Fenech
Apr 30th 2011, 08:23
@Hili,
We have seen what the parliamentarians have dished out against the wishes of the maltese these last 25 years just to please the EU. Maybe your are content with the Euro 1.16 cents they have given you a stark comparision to their 500 Euros per week from 2008. MEPA is a shining example of destruction, take Valletta for a start.
Mr Joe Zammit
Apr 29th 2011, 11:10
The two characteristics of every marriage are Unity and Indissolubility. All marriages, religious nor not, are indissoluble!
Unity means a marriage between one man and one woman.
Indissolubility makes marriage for ever, i.e., until the death of one of the spouses.
It is possible to get married for life, always by God's grace. That's why the saying goes: Three to get married: the groom, the bridegroom and God.
What we must all remember is that basically marriage is a life-long service.
Marriage + Divorce = Cohabitation
Mr Tony Camilleri
Apr 29th 2011, 14:53
The two characteristics of every marriage are Unity and Indissolubility. All marriages, religious nor not, are indissoluble!
So now you also want to impose your orders on those who only marry in a civil marriage?
Why not restrict yourself to the religions ones?
Who do you think you are Joe?
Mr Joe Zammit
Apr 29th 2011, 11:09
Some are mixing up divorce with remarriage. Divorce is not remarriage. Divorce is the dissolution of a validly contracted marriage by a human person. In an annulment there is no dissolution because there is no marriage.
And here is the evil of divorce: you have a valid marriage in which the spouses have solemnly VOWED to remain each other's, to remain faithful to each other in that, and ONLY in that marriage, and then somebody who has no say in that marriage abuses by declaring that marriage invalid.
What God has united let no man, no State put asunder! This is the greatest argument against the evil and the superficiality of divorce. No person, no MP can vote for it without sinning seriously against God! Divorce is intrinsic evil and as such it admits of NO exception! Divorce is always a grave sin that separates the sinner from God and puts them on the path to hell … and to hell for ever!
Join in the battle between God and the devil! Fight the good fight! The victory is ours, it’s already guaranteed!
Mr Tony Camilleri
Apr 29th 2011, 14:51
This shows that Mrs Yvonne Arqueros Ebejer is right, for how and why should you present your credentials to two different persons of the same State when credentials are presented to the highest authority or representative of a State? Pity there was not a third presentations for they would then claim to be a Trinity (not the Holy Trinity).
Mr Evarist Saliba
Apr 29th 2011, 10:38
It is not correct to state that Andorra's head of state is a bishop. This office is shared between the President of the Republic of France and the bishop of Seo de Urgel. I should know because in 1990's I presented my credentials as Malta's ambassador to Andorra to both persons.
It is surprising that people have to resort to such misleading statements to bolster their arguments.
Evarist Saliba
Former ambassador of Malta to Andorra.
Mr M Vella***
Apr 29th 2011, 10:02
Vatican rules LOL ,Soon you will not be able to vote without the presence of your parish priest next to you..
Don't let your loved ones cohabit all their life,desperate,children out of wedlock,people calling them names behind their backs,POGGUTI FOR EVER,you can change that,go and vote yes for divorce and let them have a family again.Don't deny a family to your loved ones .
Don't cohabit but marry so vote YES FOR DIVORCE.
Gerry Cowie
Apr 29th 2011, 11:46
Your continued use of shouting using capital letters and poking fun at the Church will only serve to turn more and more people against divorce. Thus you may well be congratulated by the anti divorce lobby for your comments!
Perhaps that is what you really want!
Mr M Vella***
Apr 29th 2011, 17:26
@Gerry Cowie,La verità offende dear Gerry hahaha!
Christian Sciberras
Apr 29th 2011, 09:34
Lets here the average Joe [Zammit]'s voice over this. Oh I know, divorce is evil and the light shall prevail.
Or something.