The rule of law is something most people do not appreciate until it hits them personally. When our neighbour is allowed to break the law with impunity, when we are not paid or cheated of our dues or when we are discriminated against and are not engaged, employed or promoted… then everyone understands!

These maladies are reaching new levels riding on the mantra of a “business-friendly” government – meaning laws will not stop anyone doing what he wishes for economic gain. The belief is that economic success, free of the rule of law, makes the population happy and wealthy.

This disregards the evident effects: that it opens the door to abuse of the honest and law abiding citizens, abuse of the environment, rampant tax evasion and the general loss of standards – on a very broad number of issues. Some issues are very serious.

The laws we are now seeing being disregarded are those very laws which create the opportunity for us to be a prosperous, free and democratic nation. Their breach threatens our very hope of a new type of services-based economy that will not destroy our environment, both rural and urban. They are our only hope to live in a law abiding community free of serious crime, including organised crime, allowing us to establish credibility in an increasingly transparent and regulated world.

We cannot afford not to collaborate for the common good and work together intelligently and unselfishly, with respect and trust in shared ideals and objectives, apart from the respect for rules of law. Yet we see weak support, insufficient resources and low budgets for – if not interference in – critical institutions; the effects of seriously confused loyalties arising from positions of trust in the civil service, the loss of opportunities arising from misguided agendas and sometimes incompetence.

Now we are in the midst of an even greater tragedy and have been flabbergasted by the failure of practically every major national institution – apart from the courts – involved in law enforcement relating to regulatory compliance and possibly serious economic crime. Ordinary citizens are the clear and present victims. No amount of sophistry or PR will cover up this problem.

Ordinary people, like me, have been saying for too long that Malta cannot grow unless we recognise that we are too small and we cannot survive with the half of the population excluded, blacklisted or antagonistic! Are we perpetually condemned to the warped view of some politicians who see only their own constituency as the nation and worthy of trust?

We have been flabbergasted by the failure of practically every major national institution – apart from the courts

So the big question is: what needs to happen the day after the next election? What should the political parties be undertaking to do once elected, given the situation?

The only way we are going to keep our momentum, and continue to grow and diversify successfully and strategically, is if the government launches a very strong campaign to reverse the systemic weaknesses which dog this country. The political parties are going to have to be radical in their approach. As a nation, we are now on the defence and it is going to take intelligence, courage and determination to turn this around.

The rule of law must be free of any doubt and so institutions must be radically restructured to work independently. There must be clear checks and balances built into the system and not the ones which insult our intelligence. Retaining ultimate executive discretion has not worked and does not work. Assuming bi-partisan agreement assumes objectivity and that too has not worked and will not work.

We can only solve this by a new constitutional body being vested with the power of appointment to important national and institutional posts. The political parties must agree to back off. The key qualities in appointments are integrity, experience, intelligence and loyalty to the legal duties they agree to undertake and to the common good – not to the person appointing them – with thinking perspectives oriented to quality, standards and the long term.

Nominees must be persons who subscribe to full transparency and accountability. There must be zero conflicts of interest through objective assessment. Family, business and intimate relationships must exclude not be the reasons for selection. Nominees must be prepared to resign if their behaviour is in any way suspect. When challenges are made to their actions – as one would expect – they must resort to open, intelligent response which shows they know their duties and responsibilities, or retire.

They must pre-emptively waive any State or private appointments which conflict, during and even after their term of office. Such nominees should be accountable first to the other members of the constitutional body – who will have no loyalty to each other – and then to the President of Malta.

I see this category of persons coming from the more senior sectors of our population as they would have proven themselves. They should not be serving or recently serving politicians, ideally not even past politicians. Retired judges and magistrates, national auditors or ombudsmen, persons who have served – not serving – in unions, employers, civil society and the religious entities, regulators, professions and those in the vocational and creative sectors  – basically people who have extensive experience of life, people who have thought and think about our country and the public good, without personal interest and long term. Governments come and go but these sectors of society are there at all times.

These will be people who will take advice and listen to wise counsel, and not be swayed by personal opinions or agendas. Their duty to be objective and loyal to the nation will prevail as they consider this one of personal self-respect, dignity and reputation.

It can be made up of 25 seats. The members will first be invited to serve by the President, on the recommendation of designated bodies or from designated sectors, with pre-stated proportions, and then will themselves fill vacancies by invitation, from the same sectors. The President will only play a role if a vacancy is not filled within one year. Their remuneration will either be zero or limited to a nominal amount and it can only be changed by Parliament, not themselves.

Their principal job will be to nominate competent persons of integrity to critical national institutions which will be stated in the Constitution – those which protect the common good. Their secondary job would be to be available to be consulted by the government on material issues which affect our general well-being.

The ultimate task would be to speak out when the public interest demands, given that things in the state of Malta are not working. The government would hopefully listen or but might not listen – but at least the population would have some objective norm to guide it in its judgement.

Today we all see we are in a mess, apart from some politicians, of course, who have a self-interest in getting elected to power and pursue their own agendas. Thankfully some of them still seek to serve the public interest.

We know that many politicians, and people loyal to them, have fallen short of the standards suggested above for nominees of a new national body. Politicians must formally exclude themselves. It is only a very humble and unselfish waiver of their own powers – in the public interest – that will assure us a credible future. Giving up one’s own power and rights is a sure sign of true collaboration. We need that now.

Let us use our heads and not protect our turf. Politicians need to stop proving that they have a serious conflict of interest when they preserve powers for themselves under the law.