Most politicians did not attend Lord Judge’s illuminating lecture on human rights earlier this month. Shame, for they would have heard a masterful exposition by the former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales on a matter that should be close to every democratic person’s heart.
During the talk organised by the Strickland Foundation, the Malta-born judge expressed concern that principles of freedom could be overlooked. While stressing the importance of the independent press and an independent judiciary – which, he said, is there to defend these rights – he warned that the greatest threat to our rights was the assumption that “things will be all right”. He reminded the packed audience that democratic systems can be subverted by individuals from within, and cited Adolf Hitler as a prime example of a man who had done just that.
Lord Judge also said that safeguarding our human rights was not about high-standing constitutional laws, but about how deeply we cherished our liberties – the rights for which the older generation fought and died.
Freedom of expression, the facility in a democratic country to voice one’s opinion without fear of oppression by the State, is one such right. Comment in Malta is free. Or at least it has been, to date, since the Nationalist Party was elected to government in 1987. However, dark clouds seem to be looming on the horizon.
Politicians in Malta have rarely been thick skinned. Perhaps it’s the price we pay for living in a small community. But rather than growing up in line with the modern world, we seem to be regressing.
A case resurfaced in the courts in recent days because a blogger termed a politician a clown. It is not our place to defend clowns, but even a clown, perhaps, would not have undertaken such a ridiculous course of action.
The Prime Minister has hardly led by example either. Last October, he instituted a breach of privilege complaint against Simon Busuttil after the Opposition leader alleged Dr Muscat interfered in a police probe over the John Dalli case.
This was nothing more than a run-of-the-mill political jibe, a conclusion – whether correct or not is immaterial – reached as a result of observation of a set of facts which he had every right to make. It is nothing short of disgraceful that it has reached this stage.
Numerous other cases abound on both sides of the political divide, but the tendency for politicians to use the arm of the law to clamp down – gag or intimidate might be better terms – on those who express opinions is becoming a matter of grave concern. Malta remains, disgracefully so, practically the only country in the EU where libel is a criminal offence (Italy is getting its house in order on this). This is an affront to freedom of speech.
The sacrosanct right to pass comment is, of course, distinct from the right of an individual to seek redress if someone has made an incorrect statement of fact that harms his reputation.
It is important here that the law protects such incursions – even unwarranted incursions into people’s private lives – not by criminal penalty but by raising the threshold of civil damages. And it follows that this should not be limited to the established press, who as a rule (there are odious exceptions) display more responsibility than individuals who take to internet forums.
With this in mind it was a welcome sight to see our courts last week showing that they will act on libellous comments posted on social media sites like Facebook. This will serve as a reminder to people that they are as much publishers as the editor of this newspaper and must also be subject to the same restrictions and sanctions. Freedom of speech is not the freedom to say what you like if you distort facts, and on this everyone must be equal before the law.
That said, when it comes to comment, freedom of expression must be the rule, and self-censorship the exception. This rule is even more compelling in as far as politicians and political dialogue is concerned, and it should be applied irrespective of whether people agree with a particular comment that is made or not. Everyone has an interest to ensure this right is not eroded.