I wasn’t intending to write about the issues within the Judiciary but then I caught Manwel Mallia, one of Labour’s Star Candidates on Bondi+ and this week’s effort virtually wrote itself.

You see, according to m’learned colleague, it’s all GonziPN’s fault that one judge has had his collar felt by the fuzz and another is metaphorically sticking a couple of fingers into the air in the general direction of the Prime Minister, and not in a Churchillian fashion, either.

This is as blatantly self-serving, for reasons which will become clear as you read on, as that Debono person saying that the former Minister of Justice had lost the confidence of the House when it was Debono’s own personal spite and vindictiveness that took down Carm Mifsud Bonnici.

Mallia is an eminent jurist, it need hardly be said, but his principal metier is the defence of (alleged) low-lifes, where erudite interpretations of arcane legal principles sometimes play second fiddle to verbal dexterity and the employment of a judicious dose of smoke and mirrors. It was thus not a major leap for him to propose that howler with a straight face, because he could safely assume that his new Best Best Friends’ consistent reluctance to do anything about bringing recalcitrant judges to heel would not be remembered by anyone.Well, the dear fellow was wrong.

Quite apart from the fact that it is ludicrous to whitewash former judge Ray Pace’s alleged behaviour and Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco’s actual behaviour by blaming the Government, what Mallia neglected to mention, quite deliberately, is that in matters of disciplining the Judiciary, the Opposition needs to be fully on board.

It was Labour, back in the day, that played politics and failed to impeach Judge Anton Depasquale when his conscience pricked him into taking quite a few years off on full pay and perks, and believe me that signal was taken on board by the people who matter.

So perhaps next time, before taking a partisan point of view from the get-go, Mallia should have paused for thought. Had he done so, he wouldn’t have gone on to go out of his way to create wiggle-room for Farrugia Sacco, by making pompous references to other eminent jurists and their view that certain social activities by members of the judiciary are not in themselves all that bad.

That’s as may be, but the point about Farrugia Sacco is not that, not by a long shot. The Commission for the Administration of Justice, quite some years ago, had made it very clear to Farrugia Sacco that his position as President of the Malta Olympic Committee was incompatible with his judicial office. There were no ifs, no buts and no maybes, there was no room for interpretation; the judge was given the message unequivocally.

He did that metaphorical thing with his fingers then, too. That he should have been impeached then, for breach of the Code of Ethics, with hindsight is clear, but equally clear is the fact that Labour would not have played ball, I am morally convinced.

The situation now is different, but only on the “I told so” level. Farrugia Sacco had been told that he should not retain his position with the Maltese Olympic Committee and his current involvement, innocent or not, in an affair that reeks of sleaze, with shady wheeler-dealing in hotel rooms captured in living colour, just underlines the solidity of the Commission’s position.

His behaviour then and now is further evidence that his position is now untenable. A judge simply can’t make the type of remarks Farrugia Sacco made a few days ago about the Prime Minister or go on television and make thinly veiled threats the way he did on Norman Hamilton’s chit-chat show a few years ago. It’s simply not on, and there’s an end to it.

Did Mallia, speaking on behalf of the Labour Party, say this? Of course not, it’s all GonziPN’s fault, he said.

He also failed to condemn his deputy leader’s wholly unwarranted and cheap attack on Magistrate Audrey Demicoli, whose dignified “no comment” contrasts so well with Farrugia Sacco’s descent into vulgarity.

Anġlu Farrugia, the one who failed to turn up to debate with Simon Busuttil on Friday and who did the same on Saturday, although he was there in person, had latched onto an Appeal Court judgment finding guilt in a loud-mouthed entrepreneur to justify his wild allegations of corrupt practices in the 2008 elections. That this was banality at its most ridiculous is besides the point, however, because he then went on to attribute political motivations to the magistrate on the basis of her father's political activism in the past.

A little less than two days later, bumping up against my deadline, inconsiderately, it was announced that Farrugia was expected to resign from the deputy leadership of the Labour Party.

Don't they know I write this thing quite a bit before Saturday?

At the time of writing, it wasn't certain that he had actually resigned or why, though the link was made with his remarks about Magistrate Demicoli.

For all I know, the real reason was his abysmal performance in the deputy leaders’ debate on Xarabank and I imagine, without a shred of evidence other than my moral conviction (if it’s good enough for Alfred Sant, it’s good enough for me) that this was not a million miles from the motivation of whoever made this happen.

I wonder who will be anointed in his stead, whatever the reason for his being dumped. It's no surprise Labour don’t mind moving Carnival, they move theirs around all the time to suit their ends.

imbocca@gmail.com

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/author/20