Existing Maltese legislation on divorce is discriminatory because it recognised divorce obtained in other countries even by Maltese couples but did not allow it to take place in Malta, AD chairman Michael Briguglio said this morning.

Civil rights spokesman Yvonne Arqueros Ebejer told a news conference held in front of the law courts that if Maltese politicians, political parties and the church were anti-divorce, why should they allow the registration of divorces obtained abroad?

If something was considered to be immoral or wrong, why should it be accepted when it came from a foreign country or if it was obtained by a small number of people, she asked.

Social policy spokesman Angele Deguara said that divorce and annulment were not the same even though many in Malta argued that they were.

Not everyone qualified for an annulment and, therefore, it was not accessible to everyone.

While an annullment declared a marriage to have never existed, divorce ended the marriage contract.

Both offered the right to remarry but they could not substitute each other and needed to be offered as alternatives to the people.

Referring to the billboards set up by the No movement, AD said these depicted a fairytale because a marriage would have expired even with separation or annulment.

The billboards did not reflect reality and the concept they put forward was too simplistic or deceitful.

He appealed to the no movement to be more sensitive to people in certain situations and to children involved in broken relationships.

AD pointed out that the separaton and broken marriage statistics in Malta were similar to those in other countries.