I refer to the letter by Reuben Sciberras, on behalf of the Ministry for Social Dialogue, Consumer Affairs and Civil Liberties, on ADF International’s remarks on the proposed Maltese Equality Bill (November 9).

ADF International advocates for fundamental human rights around the world. In addition to holding Ecosoc consultative status with the United Nations, ADF International has accreditation with the European Commission and Parliament, the Organisation of American States and works with the fundamental rights agency of the European Union and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe

ADF International is involved in 400 legal matters around the world and, in the last 12 months alone, we have been involved in five victories at the European Court of Human Rights for religious freedom.

The suggestion that our “ideology” would undermine “the rights of minorities and religious freedom and pluralism” stands in stark contrast to our work around the globe. For example, advocating for religious minorities in the Middle East, seeking prosecution of Boko Haram leaders in Nigeria and preventing the deportation of Christian converts to countries where they face the death penalty.

Given our expertise, we are regularly asked to review legislative drafts. Adina Portaru, who has a PhD in European and international human rights law with a special focus on religious freedom, was invited to present her in-depth analysis of the Bill at the Maltese Chamber of Advocates. She concluded that it contained vague terminology and lacked foreseeability, predictability and legal certainty. She also highlighted the “presumption of guilt” it contains, basing law on subjective feelings and making it extremely difficult for defendants to prove their innocence.

ADF International raised concerns with this Bill precisely because of the disproportionate impact it could have on religious minorities and others, including small business owners.

We stand by our analysis and encourage others to read it and decide for themselves. A good democratic debate should focus less on its participants and more on their arguments.