Last Sunday this newspaper carried a front page story highlighting a European Court of Human Rights judgment which held that stop and search provisions under the UK's terrorism legislation was illegal because it allowed police to stop individuals on the basis of a "hunch" or "professional intuition" - as opposed to using the acceptable ground of 'reasonable suspicion'.
Moreover, after obtaining the opinions of local lawyers, we questioned whether the practice adopted during roadblocks in Malta could, therefore, in the eyes of the ECHR, be illegal too.
Home Affairs Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said by way of reaction: "The ruling attacks the immense powers given to the police in the UK by the anti-terrorism law, which allows searches if it is expedient to do so. In Malta, the basis is one of reasonable suspicion so I cannot see how this judgment, at face value, impinges on our state of affairs."
It is entirely possible that the minister has never been stopped during a roadblock. However, many other people have. And they will tell you that the police - or, as is much more common, army personnel dressed in military fatigues - adopt as a guideline anything but 'reasonable suspicion' when they order a vehicle to pull up at the roadside. The process is as random as the Super 5 lottery - what the ECHR described, in fact, as a "hunch" or "professional intuition".
To some extent they cannot be blamed for this because unlike several other countries like the UK which the ECHR judgment refers to, there are no guidelines as to what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion' in Malta. Elsewhere police must have - and communicate - some tangible ground for believing that a particular individual has been involved, or is about to be involved, in some crime or other. A lone male in a Ford Escort with a large exhaust pipe does not, in itself, satisfy this test.
Not only does the army not offer any explanation as to why drivers have been stopped - a practice associated with police states - they proceed to search the vehicle and, as our story about a man being strip-searched illustrates today, the person. The experience is degrading, humiliating and unbefitting of a modern democracy like ours.
Dr Mifsud Bonnici said that anybody who felt aggrieved by the experience had every right to seek legal redress. However, even if this were adequate - it is not - he has rather missed the point.
It is up to him, as Home Affairs Minister, and up to senior officers in the police force and army, to ensure that abuse does not occur in the first place.
As things stand even asking a question to the police or army personnel is enough to land an individual with an obstruction charge.
One argument often made to justify roadblocks is that individuals are caught with drugs. Statistics for last year, which show that only 67 individuals were detained on suspicion of a committing an offence despite 1,159 vehicles being stopped, does not do much to bear that out. But, even if it did, it is not right that at least 1,092 law abiding citizens suffer in the process.
Moreover, using the same logic, why do the police not search every individual that frequents Paceville?
Reasons may include impracticability as well as a desire not to harm business. But the overriding consideration has to be, as is the case with roadblocks, because it is an infringement of human rights. And it is time our politicians did something about it.