Henrik Ibsen’s play An Enemy of the People, depicting, among other things, the bullying of the media in Norway towards the end of the 19th century, is very relevant to Malta today where press freedom is under threat.

Dr Stockman, the protagonist of the play, discovers that the town’s health baths, an economic bonanza for the local economy, are polluted and have become a health hazard.

Cognisant of the mayor’s resistance, he turns to the town’s newspaper. The editor promises full support to expose the scandal but is browbeat into submission by the mayor who strongly hinted that the local business community will stop advertising if the baths are closed. Act two masterfully portrays the paper’s capitulation.

Press freedom has also been threatened in the last few days.

L-Orizzont’s journalist Victor Vella received a hostile anonymous letter telling him to leave Malta together with his wife and their two adopted Ethiopian children. Then, last Sunday, during a demonstration by the so-called Patrijotti Maltin, journalists were shoved around.

As was to be expected, Vella was not intimidated and continued writing very good reports for his paper. In the second case, the police briefly held one of the demonstrators.

Journalists expect by right the full protection of the law.

Similar nasty happenings are, unfortunately, part of a journalist’s job. I had police stationed outside my house for a number of weeks following credible threats made against me after I criticised the Maltese far-right immigration policies during a television programme.

There were, however, two much more series incidents attacking the lifeblood of journalism, that is sources, and, in one of the cases, a journalist can possibly face imprisonment.

The first attempt to hunt out sources was made by former parliamentary secretary Michael Falzon. He wanted the Speaker to investigate who allegedly leaked the report of the Auditor General about the Falzon/Gaffarena scandal to the Times of Malta. This attempt fizzled out when the Speaker said there were no sources to ferret out. But the attempt was made, and condemnable it surely is.

The second, much more serious case, occurred in court. The lawyers of Health Minister Konrad Mizzi asked the court to declare that Daphne Caruana Galizia is not a journalist and consequently must be obliged to reveal the source of her story, which Mizzi is denying.

I have no brief or interest to defend Caruana Galizia personally. I have on several occasions been on the wrong end of her stick and I strongly object to a number of features she publishes. But saying she is not a journalist is absurd and ridiculous. She regularly breaks very good journalistic reports. Her blog has a larger audience than several newspapers, radio stations, TV journalistic programmes and news blogs owned by traditional media companies.

A population that abandons its independent media will deprive itself of a bulwark against corruption and bad governance

The attempt to force her to reveal her sources, to whom she promised confidentiality, is despicable and disgraceful. It is a grave attempt against the freedom of the press.

The refusal to call her a journalist because she is not registered with the Department of Information is ludicrous. I have been an editor of one newspaper and two radio stations. I was awarded the first Gold Award for – in the estimation of the judges – my “outstanding contribution to professional journalism”. But I am not registered with the Department of Information. Am I not a journalist?

There is a lot of literature defining a journalist. Digital technology challenges traditional definitions. The internet has created what professor Yochai Benkler calls the “networked fourth estate”, which “combines elements of both traditional and novel forms of news media”. Besides, ‘citizen journalism’ is today considered to be true journalism.

If our legislation has not moved with the technological developments, one would have expected that a liberal and progressive Cabinet member would have worked to update it and not use his lawyers to abuse it. The behaviour of the minister’s lawyers mimics the limited definition of a journalist given in countries such as Uzbekistan.

But being the best in Europe we should imitate the Recommendation (2000/7) adopted by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers which states: “The term ‘journalist’ means any natural or legal person who is regularly or professionally engaged in the collection and dissemination of information to the public via any means of mass communication.”

All these falling under this definition have the right to protect their sources and the courts are there to see that this right is fully respected.

Principle 2 of the above-cited Council of Europe Recommendation goes a step further: “Other persons who, by their professional relations with journalists, acquire knowledge of information identifying a source through the collection, editorial processing or dissemination of this information, should equally be protected under the principles established herein.”

The Norwegian Supreme Court has pointed out that: “It must be assumed that a broad protection of sources will lead to more revelations of hidden matters than if the protection is limited or not given at all.”

Will Malta follow Uzbekistan or the Council of Europe, Norway and the democratic world?

What minister Mizzi is trying to do through his lawyers is not an attack on Caruana Galizia but an attack on our basic rights and freedoms. If journalists cannot protect their sources, the right to the freedom of the press will be eroded.

The people in Ibsen’s play dastardly absconded their duty to defend the source of the media report, Dr Stockman, who was left all alone. Will the Maltese do the same? Beware that a population that abandons its independent media will deprive itself of a bulwark against corruption and bad governance.

Malta’s Institute of Journalists deserves full marks for defending Vella and the journalist harassed at the demonstration. But their silence about the other two cases is deafening and shameful. On the other hand the reaction of freedom-loving citizens is a determined and resounding: we shall not be moved.

joseph.borg@um.edu.mt