Civil Liberties Minister Helena Dalli. Photo: Mark Zammit Cordina

Civil Liberties Minister Helena Dalli yesterday questioned why it should be acceptable for a priest who abused children to be treated differently from another person.

“Why should a priest be simply defrocked while another person is imprisoned?” she asked in Parliament.

She was speaking during the third reading of a Bill to amend the Marriage Act, which will remove the supremacy of the Ecclesiastical Tribunal over the law courts in annulment proceedings and bring about a clearer separation of Church and State.

But one had to ensure the supremacy of the Maltese courts with respect to criminal offences committed by members of the clergy as well, she said.

The fact that criminal proceedings could not be instituted against priests was another anomaly that gave rise to discrimination.

Why should a priest be simply defrocked while another person is imprisoned?

With the amendments to the Marriage Act, a Labour government has come a step closer to ensuring an equal society, she said.

Couples whose marriage had ended suffered an injustice when annulment proceedings stayed pending for several years.

It was good that Opposition MP Beppe Fenech Adami had understood, admitted and argued that such people deserved an apology.

Dr Dalli said the amendments would protect individuals’ fundamental human rights as guaranteed by the Constitution of Malta and the European Convention on Human Rights, guaranteeing access to the courts.

With the enactment of the Marriage Bill, the civil courts would be supreme in annulment proceedings and, therefore, they would be able to preside over a case even if one of the parties instituted proceedings before the Ecclesias-tical Tribunal.

The civil courts would not be bound by the decision of the tribunal.

Earlier, Dr Dalli said that the Bill revised the “infamous” agreement signed by the late former Foreign Minister Guido de Marco, which had taken Malta a step backwards in the area of State-Church separation.

This agreement, making the Ecclesiastical Tribunal supreme with regard to annulment proceedings, violated the fundamental rights of individuals since they were not guaranteed access to the courts of law.

The system also gave rise to abuse: spouses instituted proceedings before the tribunal to delay the case out of spite.