Bill based on ‘what our society accepts’
Bill’s proposal is ‘far inferior to marriage’
The Bill disappointed gay rights groups. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier
The State will not recognise cohabiting partners on the same level as families bourne out of marriage under a proposed law on cohabitation.
The long-awaited Bill published yesterday by Justice Minister Chris Said introduces the idea of a “civil cohabitation partnership essentially a registered contract between two people.
“We do not want to put cohabitation on the same level as a family constituted in marriage,” Dr Said insisted at a press conference launching the consultation process on the Bill.
“The Bill is based on what the government believes is right and is acceptable to society.”
The civil cohabitation partnership is a public deed between the individuals, including same-sex couples, outlining mutual obligations and how they intend to organise their relationship.
Couples who register a civil cohabitation partnership will be given next-of-kin rights, which include the right to take decisions on the partner’s behalf in health matters. Registered partnerships will automatically give a non-EU spouse residency and work permit rights.
However, the Bill has disappointed the gay community. The Malta Gay Rights Movement,a lobby group, said it was “hugely disappointed” as the Bill failed to recognise same-sex couples and their families as civil unions on a par with marriage, the minimum acceptable to them.
Replying to questions on whether the Bill enjoyed majority backing in Parliament, the minister said it would depend on the outcome of the parliamentary debate. Dr Said said the debate within the PN parliamentary group was “lively” and independent MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando had been consulted.
Dr Pullicino Orlando, who earlier this year publicly spoke in favour of gay marriage, yesterday said the Bill was long overdue but a step in the right direction. He would be proposing “some amendments” during the parliamentary debate and would meet the MGRM and those associated with gay rights for their reactions and suggestions.
“One issue I feel extremely strong about is the status of children adopted by gay individuals who later enter a registered partnership.
“If the adoptive parent dies, the child should have the right to continue living with the surviving partner, who would have assisted in the upbringing,” Dr Pullicino Orlando said.
Although the civil cohabitation partnership is not too different from the current situation where any two individuals can sign an agreement in front of a notary outlining mutual obligations, Dr Said noted the arrangement would now be regulated by a specific law.
“The law makes it clear that cohabitation is no longer illicit or illegal and this will clarify matters in court if the relationship fails.”
The Bill also makes provisions for situations where cohabiting partners do not register their relationship with a notary.
The law will recognise the rights of the individuals if they lived together under the same roof in “an intimate and committed relation-ship” for at least five years. The period drops to two years if children are born from the relationship.
The Bill makes no tax-related provisions and does not cover siblings or relatives living under the same roof.
Cohabiting partners from previous marriages cannot register their relationship and will not be recognised as such unless they are legally separated.
Reacting to the Bill, a Labour Party spokesman said the opposition will wait for the draft law that the government will eventually present in Parliament.
“We will comment in due course but (Labour leader) Joseph Muscat has long taken the lead and publicly stated that he is in favour of civil unions for gay couples. That position stands,” the spokesman said.
The Bill was criticised by Alternattiva Demokratika chairman Michael Briguglio, who said the proposed registration of same-sex couples was not enough.
“While other political parties propose civil unions or registered partnerships, AD is in sync with the proposals of MGRM for recognition of same-sex marriage. Only the right of marriage represents equality.”
A more scathing reaction was that of the gay rights lobby group.
Gabi Calleja, MGRM co-ordinator, said the Bill continued to stigmatise same-sex couples and their families by preventing access to equal rights and creating a separate form of recognition that is “by far inferior to marriage”.
Public consultation on the Bill is open until the end of September.
The government intends to kick start the discussion in Parliament when it reconvenes on October 1.
Regulating cohabitation
Who is covered?
Two adults, of the same or opposite sex, who live as a couple in an intimate and committed relationship.
Who is not covered?
Siblings living under the same roof or related adults.
What is a civil cohabitation partnership?
Cohabiting individuals can register their partnership and formalise obligations in front of a notary by public deed.
What will the contract cover?
The parties’ reciprocal and individual obligations, including amounts due if one partner is dependent on the other. It must contain a description of the house where the couple will live, who has legal title over it and how any children are to be maintained, brought up and educated.
If a couple does not register, will they be covered by law?
Yes. Two adults will be considered as legally cohabiting after living together for five years; two if they have children.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Marsa murder - Police looking...
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Former Judge Ray Pace found dead
Where’s Everybody staff is given notice
Revealed...the face of a Maltese woman...
Update 4 - Eddie Fenech Adami stable...
Update 3 - Woman trapped as car crashes...
Updated - Two bodies, capsized boat,...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
In Discussion
Update 2: Three arrests after flamingo...
Enemalta seeking minimum five year gas...
Mario de Marco, Zammit Dimech concede,...
Chinese company to study Malta-Gozo...
Updated - PM reacts to Labour anger on...
Franco Mercieca doing routine eye ops at...
No appeals board for first part of power...
Updated - PM comments as Franco Mercieca...
BBC site highlights illegal hunting in Malta
22 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Maria Borg
Aug 31st 2012, 18:46
The way I see it Marriage is a Contract to form a partnership between 2 adults who can be upheld or broken depending on circumstances irrespective of sex or race therefore it cannot and shouldn't exclude anyone.
Anyone wishing to form a partnership should have the same opportunity to do so otherwise it is downright discriminatory. Religion should not come into this, religious marriage is one thing, civil marriage another and should apply to every human being at the same level with no distinctions including 'tax provisions'.
R. Caruana
Aug 29th 2012, 20:03
Aren't gay PART of society?? what is this new theory!?!
M Vella
Aug 29th 2012, 20:01
That's a funny one. Human rights are there to protect us as individuals from this kind of insanity belted out by governments, political parties or any other groups or entities. The government of Malta turns this on his head and decides by what they think is acceptable to the bigots that will vote again for them. Nice try. In other words the government's guiding light is petty ignorance and fear.
Ms. P.M Graham
Aug 29th 2012, 19:41
This Bill is not worth the ink it is written in. It is purely and simply a pre election ploy. That's how stupid the Government think the electorate are.
"Couples who register a civil cohabitation partnership will be given next-of-kin rights, which include the right to take decisions on the partner’s behalf in health matters. "
Any sensible couple will have those arrangements already legally written. My next of kin is my partner and vice versa and Wills etc have been made accordingly along with life insurance and inheritance so the Bill does nothing for us.
Mr Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Aug 29th 2012, 22:41
Spot on!
DR EMMANUEL BEZZINA,MA,MAG.JUR.[EU Law],LL.D.,
Aug 29th 2012, 19:12
However there has to be alot of food for thought for couples rushing to cohabit with one another, particularly if legal separation has already been effected. How to counter act it ? Well seek proper legal advice such as entering into a contract outlining specifically the nature of the partnership before actually going for the partnership..........................prudence prevents pitfalls:
Clifton Carl Barbara
Aug 29th 2012, 18:16
Unfortunately it’s ineffectual for gay couples but it’s an excellent loophole for the non-EU members.
In Portugal, prostitutes and drug addicts do sign a similar agreement in return for an annual fee.
Robert Callus
Aug 29th 2012, 17:47
“The Bill is based on what the government believes is right and is acceptable to society.”
In which church was this decided?
Apart from that, the concept goes against the most basic premises of Human Rights. Unless they trample on the rights of others (which is definitely not the case here), the rights of minorities should be respected regardless of the opinion of the majority.
Exaggerated example to signify this point:
What if 75% of society believes that people from a minority group which forms 5% could be killed with impunity? Would a legislation that allows anyone to kill those people with impunity be considered as ethical and democratic because it is "acceptable to society"?
j dough
Aug 29th 2012, 17:03
I agree cohabitation is not the same as marriage ...SO...LET GAY COUPLES MARRY and the problem is solved. otherwise you are discriminating against same-gender couples.
the rest of us have a choice (marry or co-habit). homosexual couples do not.
E. Azzopardi
Aug 29th 2012, 14:11
It has nothing to do with religion.
Fully concur. How can cohabitation be like families bourne out of marriage? They are two totally different instances. If there are those who cannot recognize the difference, then something is wrong with them,
Franco Attard Trevisan
Aug 29th 2012, 16:31
Man + Woman + children are a family irrespective of whether they are married or not!
Tony Borg
Aug 29th 2012, 11:28
The Minister should have said that the bill is based on what the Bishop (and not the Bishops and Archbishop) accepts.
Philip Bonello
Aug 29th 2012, 10:49
Let's put things in a clear perspective. The family is the basic building block of society and society would disintegrate without it. Moreover the family is the unit that PRODUCES babies for society to expand. Any other two adults living together of whatever sex and whatever relation to each other are not a family even if they raise a (somebody else's) child. Let's not mix things up.
Consequently while cohabiting adults should have laws to protect them from themselves and from greedier members of society, they do not constitute family and should not be recognised as such. In the general hierarchy of society the traditional family should be given the highest recognition.
Ellen Pace
Aug 29th 2012, 11:23
The family is the basic building block of society, and 'family' is defined as a social unit consisting of parents and children.
You are referring to the 'traditional family',
You are implying that same sex-couples are undeserving and somehow incapable of raising children in secure, happy and loving conditions (whether children are adopted or from previous relationships, which does also happen)
Are you also implying that single parents and families with separated/divorced parents are not 'real' families?
Kenneth Grima
Aug 29th 2012, 13:02
so what you are saying is that if a man and a women cannot reproduce beacuse they are infertile they should not be considered a family and as such they should not be given marriage rights?
Franco Attard Trevisan
Aug 29th 2012, 14:37
@ Phillip Bonello
So you are implying that a couple (man & woman) who have kids together and live together but are not married are not a family??
Mr Andrew Camilleri
Aug 29th 2012, 14:43
Sure, give the traditional family the highest recognition - but why not give rights to other forms of families?
Ellen Pace
Aug 29th 2012, 10:44
Perhaps the government should actually ask 'society' how it feels about the possible introduction of same sex civil unions before it speaks for everyone?
Franco Attard Trevisan
Aug 29th 2012, 10:27
1 - What's the use of this bill if there are no 'tax provisions'???
2 - “The Bill is based on what the government believes is right and is acceptable to society.” .. Can someone from the gov explain what they based their conclusions on??
K Scicluna
Aug 29th 2012, 12:54
Couldn't have said it better myself Mr.Attard.
Luke Lanzon
Aug 29th 2012, 09:55
“The Bill is based on what the government believes is right and is acceptable to society.”
In other words our society is against equal rights, good to know.
william cauchi
Aug 29th 2012, 09:53
''based on what society accepts''
Pardon me, who is this genius who knows exactly what ''society'' accepts and doesn't. Who is this genius who can preach or talk on behalf of ''society''?
And who or what does this ''society'' consist of?
Certain declarations, just thrown up in the air, makes you think. What is this authority talking about? Or are they saying something just to say something.
Please choose the reason of your report below: