[attach id=573213 size="medium"][/attach]

It is no doubt praiseworthy when the highest functionaries, including Church personalities, do not shy away from public fora such as television. However, they cannot be praised if they make use of their weighty presence to indiscriminately attack ordinary citizens who do not agree with them.

In the programme Dissett of April 5 on TVM, the presenter asked Archbishop Charles Scicluna why the new RTK management he is responsible for has created chaos in the station’s programmes and also much needless suffering to the employees and presenters, including full-timers. To answer the question (or, better, to avoid giving an answer), the Archbishop felt he should personally attack a “university professor” who (according to him) turned his last programme on the schedule into a “moaning party” (gerger-party), adding that such behaviour was unworthy of a university professor and placing it in the context of “violent, unexpected reactions that show you clearly who the person is and what kind of person he is”.

Although the Archbishop was careful not to mention any names, to the large number of listeners who follow the programme on RTK it was crystal clear he was referring to me. Since I do not have anything to be ashamed of, I have no problem to openly admit as such.

The reference here is to the weekly programme Seħer il-Malti, which I presented on RTK radio for the last 13 years, with the help of Thomas Pace and other colleagues and in which I used to converse freely with listeners about the Maltese language.

The programme, a practical extension of my academic work beyond the confines of the university, had become a regular appointment for thousands of listeners in Malta and Gozo as well as for many emigrants, who used to keenly look forward to it.

Mgr Scicluna’s insensitive new management decided to move the programme from the ideal time during Saturday lunchtime and reduce it by half. This was their decision. However, we neither could nor would accept the new conditions because they were clearly a demotion of both the programme and the importance given to the Maltese language on the station.

Is it possible that, at the slightest sign of dissent, the old Church reappears to try and crush those who do not agree with it?

On April 1, when we informed the listeners that that was to be our last programme, we were inundated with telephone calls from them, clearly showing they were deeply disappointed. Our programme, which, on principle, always encouraged people to phone in and express their opinions freely, could not stop them from phoning in and expressing their justified disappointment. In spite of this, contrary to what the Archbishop said, the programme followed its linguistic agenda till the end.

Since everyone should be responsible for what one says, especially in the public media, I would like to ask the Archbishop the following questions and I expect a public answer from him.

Is it appropriate to denigrate listeners who express opinions we do not agree with by calling their expression of disappointment a ‘moaning party’?

Can he quote, in proof of his public statement, one single phrase or moment from the programme in which there was some kind of ‘violent and unexpected reaction’ from me or in which I incited listeners to show their disappointment or showed behaviour unworthy of a university professor?

I am a senior university professor and, thank God, I am respected by all my students, colleagues, listeners and by the former RTK management, which included persons of high public esteem such as Karl Wright, Fr John Avellino and Tonio Bonello.

What right does the Archbishop have to spread this injurious opinion about me, without even knowing me and without any shred of evidence and to accuse me of behaving in a way that is unworthy of a university professor, thus harming me professionally?

Or is it the case that any means of insolence becomes justifiable if someone does not agree with him? How seriously can we take him when he preaches against hate speech?

I served RTK radio loyally for all of 13 years, sacrificing every Saturday, and the only thanks I get from the Archbishop as employer is this violent public assault on my person. Does he not think this sets a very bad example for employers?

I must admit that, in spite of this public insult, I feel strengthened by the huge support I received from my listeners, both before and, in particular, after the Archbishop’s unfortunate outburst. I would like to let them know that the programme Seħer il-Malti, in its original format, will soon be aired on another radio station since, within just one week, we got offers from three main radio stations.

Within a wider context and, apart from my individual case, I find the Archbishop’s behaviour very disturbing and worrying to all those who cherish freedom of expression.

There is every indication that the new RTK management is in a panic following the disaster they have created and the strong reactions of the listeners. The Archbishop’s inappropriate words, dressed up in bitter but transparent irony, are no other than what T.S. Eliot calls “the desperate exercise of failing power”. But is it possible that, in spite of its modern guise and all the talk of dialogue and mercy, at the slightest sign of dissent the old Church reappears to try and crush those who do not agree with it in order to silence them?

It goes without saying that I expect a public apology from the Archbishop for his irresponsible and unworthy behaviour that measures up to the offence I had to suffer in his hands since everybody has the right to defend one’s personal dignity.

If the Archbishop cherishes the humility and honesty he always talks about, it should not be difficult for him to make up for publicly harming me and my listeners.

After all, everyone can make a mistake.

Manwel Mifsud is a professor of Maltese at the University of Malta.