The government and the opposition, meeting in the House Business Committee, this evening failed to set a date when Parliament will start to debate reform of the judicial sector.
Bills by the government and the opposition on judicial reform are to be presented for first reading in Parliament this evening. The first reading formally authorises the publication of the bills.
However no agreement was reached on when the debates would actually be held and whether there would be one debate. The two sides will hold a meeting to discuss ways to marge their proposals and the House Business Committee will meet again on Tuesday next week to possibly set a debate date.
Justice Minister Owen Bonnici said the government bill would be far broader than the opposition's bill, including not just judicial appointments, but issues such as accountability of the judiciary and the functions of the Commission for the Administration of Justice, as well as the working conditions of judges and magistrates, among others.
Dr Bonnici noted that the opposition bill related only to the appointment of the judiciary and differed from the Bonello Commission recommendations. The government, for example, disagreed with a PN proposal for the nominating commission to include representatives of the parties, among other things.
The government, he said, would seek consensus on its proposals. The two sides should therefore meet and discuss the way forward.
Mario de Marco (PN) said it was good that there was consensus on the need to reform the manner of appointment of the members of the judiciary. However this reform did not need to be directly linked to the way how the Commission for the Administration of Justice operated, or to changes in the working conditions of judges or magistrates, although those changes were needed too.
Parliamentary Secretary Deborah Schembri said the government was following the programme as laid out in its electoral manifesto.
Dr Bonnici said all three aspects were linked. The Giovanni Bonello Commission had said that institutional reforms, should, ideally, be made together. Furthermore, the opposition motion itself included both the manner of appointment of judges and an extension of the retirement age. He again suggested a meeting to discuss the way forward.
Dr de Marco said the Opposition was not against discussion with the government and its own proposals were not cast in stone. But the debate in the House should not be put off. They should therefore agree on a date when the second reading (the actual debate int he House) could start.
Government whip Godfrey Farrugia suggested the two sides meet before the next House Business Committee meeting on February 29 when a date for the debate would be set.
Dr de Marco and David Agius (PN) said the government bill had not been published yet. The Opposition would see what the government was proposing, and then one would set the way forward.
Dr de Marco insisted that the second reading debate should start even as the two sides sought political consensus.
Dr Bonnici said he was ready to commit to a meeting with the opposition by February 29. However one had to consider whether meetings should also be held with interested parties such as the judiciary itself. There should not be undue process on such a delicate issue.
Mr Agius said the opposition wanted the debate to start next week. It was eventually agreed that the House Business Committee will meet again on Tuesday next week to possibly set a debate date.
The committee also agreed that the House will next week debate a bill to amend the Employment and Industrial Relations Act. The bill follows a Constitutional Court judgment last week that the composition of the industrial Tribunal is unconstitutional.