‘To be or not to be’, is the famous opening question posed by William Shakespeare in Hamlet. ‘To be or not to be a silent citizen?’ is my adapted question. It is a simple question.

Yet, it has profound, challenging and provoking connotations. Whatever the response is, it has repercussions. Some repercussions may have life-long consequences. Others may come with a hefty price to pay for voicing one’s voice.

An old English adage says ‘silence is golden’. Certainly, there may be times that silence is recommendable. Sometimes it is better to say less or nothing rather than to talk. Talk can be cheap. Silence can be powerful and evocative. It can convey a deep significant message of support, understanding and empathy.

But can one stand in silence in the face of injustice, everlasting scandals, lack of accountability, bad governance and corruption? Can one close an eye to dodgy dealings and shady characters? Can one remain silent while spin doctors distort truth and manipulate facts?

Can constituted bodies remain passive so as to remain in the good books of the powers that sustain them? Should the culture of omertà be encouraged? Can silence, in these cases, be understood as a sign of lack of leadership, collusion or even approval? In view of our current degenerated political scenario, prompted by the Panama Papers debacle and its local ramifications and intrigues, these questions are more pertinent and pressing than ever.

These questions are not addressed to the blinkered political hardcore. Clearly, their reply is predicable. Mostly it is dictated by party spin rather than by conviction or by a well-informed conclusion.

My question is specifically addressed to two main categories.

First, to the majority of honest hardworking and law-abiding citizens, who mostly are middle-of-the-road voters and who care enough to demand to live in a normal, healthy, democratic European country. Secondly, my question is posed to our current political class.

Unfortunately, the latter failed to have a united voice. A total 38 deputies out of 69, voted to remain silent. The majority of the House decided that it was rather ‘normal’ and ‘acceptable’ that a senior Cabinet minister (and the only EU Cabinet minister for that) and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff be associated with tax havens and dubious financial dealings.

Government lost the chance to state clearly that tax havens and shady financial dealings are politically not on

This is Malta after all, some cynical observer may say. In other ‘normal’ countries, both honourable gentlemen would be asked to resign with immediate effect. During the 13-hour-long marathon debate, all Labour speakers went off tangent and sought only to blow their trumpets. Ironically, even the Minister of Finance.

I cannot fathom how the minister can in the near future insist with us, lesser mortals, to adhere to fiscal morality. With the exception of Minister Evarist Bartolo, who pointed out that doing things legally doesn’t always equate as being politically correct, all other speakers avoided the elephant in the room.

Minister Konrad Mizzi tried very hard to square the circle. His pseudo arguments succeeded only to further insult the average intelligent citizen. The Prime Minister’s speech was short and aggressive. Sadly he missed an opportunity to come clean.

The Labour government lost the chance to state clearly that tax havens and shady financial dealings arepolitically not on. It was also a missed chance to convey an unequivocal strong message as to what active citizens are rightly demanding.

Now, the Prime Minister has reshuffled his Cabinet. It clearly seemed like a cosmetic face-saving exercise. Keeping Mizzi working behind the scenes and for Keith Schembri to retain his post is just rubbing salt into the wound.

The Labour government, instead of tackling the issue, as advised even by Labour stalwarts, preferred to appear business as usual. Simon Busuttil was right in stating that the government was in a state of denial.

During these nine weeks, the government came up with all sorts of allegations and counter accusations just to divert public attention and silence its critics. Its strategy not only failed but also served to consolidate and increase the public outcry. While I have no qualms in stating that corruption is always wrong, whatever source it comes from, honest citizens are just tired of all this mudslinging tribal, trash politics.

Our nation needs active citizens who are not afraid to speak out. We do not need citizens that are like sheep. Malta still needs active citizens who cherish the values of honesty, integrity, equality and social justice.

In the Divine Comedy, Dante Aligheri wrote: “The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their silence.”

It is for this reason that on Saturday, May 7, I accepted the invitation by the Civil Society Network to join a nonpartisan protest. It is a call to raise once more our voice as an honest nation.

What may be acceptable or justified to some is surely not acceptable and justified to many other active citizens.

To be or not to be then? I choose to be an active citizen.

What about you? Are you in?

Albert Buttigieg is a Nationalist Party candidate on the ninth and tenth districts and deputy mayor of St Julian’s.