Kate Holmes is the mother of Daniel, a Welshman currently serving a prison sentence of over 10 years in Malta after being found guilty for cannabis possession. The sentence, which also included a €23,000 fine, triggered quite a bit of controversy yet the appeal was rejected. Last year it was reported that Holmes would file a petition to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and ask that court to rule that his rights to fair trial and effective remedy had been breached by the Maltese courts.

Kate and Daniel’s father Mel, requested the Maltese authorities to grant their son an amnesty. Apparently, this appeal was rejected. On January 4, Ms Holmes made a fresh appeal for Daniel’s release. In her letter, she referred to Frenċ tal-Għarb, claiming that it was a known fact that the Gozitan had cured many sick people and that cannabis was his secret medicine.

Much as this may be a rumour circulated by some, no credible evidence exists to support any claim that Frenċ tal-Għarb administered cannabis in any form. On the other hand, it is an established fact that he made use of natural herbs for medicinal purposes.

However, I cannot consider how one could take it against the poor mother who had just spent another Christmas apart from her son who is serving a prison sentence many hold to be excessive and unjust in a foreign country which some hold to be the most generous country in the world.

Is it really the role of a local council to defend the reputation of its inhabitants even once these have passed away?

Her big mistake was to repeat a rumour which someone might have whispered to her at some point. Rather shocking since we are not known to be gossip mongers in this country. However, her words seem to have greatly irritated the local council in Għarb that threatened to take legal action against her for having tarnished the reputation of Frenċ tal-Għarb.

The poor lady immediately withdrew her allegations on the Gozitan faith healer and this appeased the local council which, in its initial threat to take legal action, had also expressed its sympathy with her while insisting that it could not allow Frenċ tal-Għarb’s reputation to be tainted.

Now I have a lot of respect for the Għarb local council and admire their hard work, but I cannot understand what led it to threaten taking legal action against a mother who is desperate to see her son back home. If anything, one would have expected the bishop or the parish priest or parish council to come out in defence of Frenċ tal-Għarb’s reputation.

Moreover, is it really the role of a local council to defend the reputation of its inhabitants even once these have passed away? If, for example, someone were to make a false allegation on the late George Borg Olivier, would the Valletta or Sliema local councils (the two localities where he lived) be the right authorities to take legal action in defence of the reputation of the architect of Malta’s independence?

Yet what really struck me was the insensitivity of all thosepersons who thought that Kate Holmes posed a real threat to the reputation of Frenċ tal-Għarb and did not exert greater compassion given that this is the Year of the Jubilee of Mercy and that just a few days earlier, the Bishop of Gozo had opened the door of mercy in the Ta’ Pinu sanctuary in Għarb itself.

I remain shocked at how it could have ever crossed anyone’s mind to even consider taking legal action against her.

This brings me to another issue. A week ago today, around 200 Muslims gathered close to the parish church in Msida for Friday prayers. Their spokesperson claimed that the reason they were meeting there was that they had been evicted from their regular meeting place, without even being given a proper reason.

The following day, persons claiming to uphold Maltese values, which I assume would include Christian values since these are a vital part of our heritage, held an activity in the precise place where members of the Muslim community had prayed on Friday. It was, however, no prayer meeting but a ‘protest’ against Muslims praying in the open air.

So it’s all right for Christians to walk in procession, hold Masses in the open air or make fools of themselves in drunken stupor during band marches when celebrating the feasts of patron saints but Muslims cannot pray in the open air. Since Roman Catholicism is the official State religion then, apparently and according to our ‘patriots’, only Roman Catholics have the right to manifest their faith in the open air.

Moreover, another silly rumour was vented and the source of this rumour was none other than the parish priest of St Paul’s Bay who said, in church and during a homily while celebrating that great sacrament of love – the Eucharist – that primary school children who took pork sandwiches to the school in that locality were being bullied and intimidated.

As reported by this newspaper, the parish priest, when asked to explain, said that he had “heard from some social workers that the incident had happened and mentioned it in passing”, and that he did not “know when it happened or whether it was one student or 10. They’re making a big deal out of nothing,” he said.

It is very worrying because this was no heartbroken mother but the spiritual leader of an entire community, which has become synonymous with the large number of non-Maltese nationals living there. The priest should have checked with the school authorities before opening his mouth and should surely have known that his comments would serve to alarm or at least ferment a certain degree of animosity towards Muslims in the locality. Lucky for him, the local council in St Paul’s Bay is not contemplating taking legal action against the priest.

Thankfully, Education Minister Evarist Bartolo immediately denied the claim and categorically stated that “there is no ban or restriction on the consumption of meat at St Paul’s Bay primary school due to religious beliefs. Any statements to the contrary are absolute nonsense.” He also described that primary school in St Paul’s Bay as “a shining example of the diverse cultural, religious and ethnic backgrounds of its pupils and how an inclusive community can be built around that”.

I recently met a 10-year-old boy who attends that school and I was truly impressed by his ability to speak about his experiences at school and from what he said, I wish there were more primary schools like that in St Paul’s Bay.

I don’t know whether priests are receiving any training in how to handle the phenomenon of multiculturalism and of having an ever growing presence of persons belonging to other faiths or to no faith at all in our communities. Only recently, during Midnight Mass, I also had to listen to a priest, when speaking about the audacity of the incarnation – God assuming flesh in the form of a baby – then stating that this was something which Muslims and Jews cannot swallow.

Why mention this in such an impolite manner if not to somehow denegrate Muslims and Jews? Would it not have been enough just to state that other religions find the incarnation difficult to understand because this requires faith?

Having in our midst people who come from other countries and uphold different religious beliefs is no threat to our society. It is, on the contrary, an opportunity for us to rediscover who we are and what we stand for and to give others the opportunity to integrate within our commuinities while also enriching us with their diversity.