In the name of freedom of expression one can now vilify any religion. This enabling Act causes concern as to its legality, urgency and timing.

Malta’s Constitution enshrines the Catholic religion as the country’s religion. This signifies that Malta as a nation adheres to the Catholic religion. To my mind, contemporaneously to vilify that religion (‘speak evil of’) and being disrespectful towards all Catholic believers does not make sense.

Incidentally, the Constitution protects other institutions such as Parliament, the government and judiciary. To my knowledge there is no similar freedom in Malta to vilify these institutions or individuals. If this is correct, why should there be this difference?

I do not understand the urgency of this legislation. I think there are more urgent things that need to be tackled by the government. To mention one, the recently reported expropriation of prime public land at Delimara by individuals, while others sweat to pay for their home, surely warrants more immediate and urgent action.

While I do not understand why our authors and artists need to vilify religion to achieve their literary and artistic heights (I see no artistic or literary merit in vilifying any religion), the timing of this law seems highly improper. It is not only the Catholic religion that is practised in Malta. With European and other eyes directed more to­wards us in the coming years, this enabling law can be dynamite.

With the hindsight of Denmark and France, and the reaction to offensive caricatures still ringing in our mind, we have now made legiti­mate, not to say prompted, the publication of offensive material: for no purpose whatsoever, rather a futile denigrating exercise.

If this freedom were to be exercised, can the legislators, the proposers, artists and authors/publishers guarantee that there will be no reaction as in other countries?

Have we put on that suicidal belt?