I refer to Reuben Sciberras’s letter (January 3) on behalf of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs to the effect that, following a judgment of the Constitutional Court requiring that hefty administrative penalties be imposed only by a court of law, the government has not acted as it is waiting for the Opposition’s reaction to amend the law. If the government’s intention is to amend the laws imposing such penalties, there is no need of the Opposition’s consent.

If, on the other hand, the government is proposing a constitutional amendment requiring the Opposition’s approval, the question arises: when an ordinary law is declared to be in breach of the Constitution, is it normal to change the Constitution rather the law itself? Unless, of course, the government is suggesting that the rights enjoyed by the citizen under the Constitution be curtailed to neutralise the effects of the court’s judgment.