Way back a few years and a bit, the Nationalist Government had proposed the impeachment of Judge Anton Depasquale after he had decided not to attend to his duties for many, many months in protest, if memory serves, over the introduction of the Commission for the Administration of Justice.

Judge Depasquale, again if memory serves, had come to the conclusion that it was something akin to lese majeste' for any organ to sit in judgement of a judge.

It is not particularly relevant what the details of the Affaire Depasquale were, anyway, with the exception of the tiny detail that the Labour Opposition had, with not a slight degree of glee, voted against the motion. As it needed two-thirds to get through, and quite properly so, the motion foundered.

This had the effect incidentally of allowing Depasquale a nice chunk of further time off but also that of giving an unequivocal signal to any other members of the judiciary, thankfully very few, who fancied playing fast and loose with the rules of propriety, that it would take something pretty gross to get themselves red-carded by the House.

It was only towards the latest smidgen of the latter part of the previous legislature that Labour changed the smoke-signals and started making noises that were interpreted to mean that if the Commission made a recommendation to impeach, they would be amenable.

So it is disingenuous for the PM now to point fingers at the Nationalists for failing to do something about the Farrugia Sacco case when they were in Government.

It's pretty obvious, anyway, that Muscat is only doing this to deflect the charges being made by the Nationalists - and by many others whose only interest is the maintenance of the rule of law - that the Government is dragging its feet about the Farrugia Sacco impeachment motion, even after the Commission for the Administration of Justice has made it crystal clear that it hasn't changed its views about the matter, which was hardly unexpected, given that nothing has changed.

The sight and sound of assorted Labour Big Beasts lumbering about debating the finer points of parliamentary procedure and human rights is wondrous to behold, though perhaps those of us on the outside looking in are justified in getting this "get on with it, why don't you?" feeling in the circumstances. We were told that the Government would follow the Commission's direction, but what we're seeing isn't much of that, now is it?

Judge Farrugia Sacco and his supporters, such as they are, have in the meantime made it known that he is feeling hard done by, that he hasn't been given the opportunity to defend himself and that all this is politically motivated anyway.

Forgive me if I don't do much to stifle a hollow laugh.

Farrugia Sacco was heard and then given the opportunity to sort things out twice by the Commission, and didn't comply. He also took his case to the Constitutional Court (First Hall and Appeal), basically alleging political influence within the Commission, and was told in no uncertain terms where to get off.

And he really thinks anyone agrees that he's the victim, here.

Wonders never cease.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.