A root-and-branch constitutional overhaul has consistently failed to materialise. Kurt Sansone traverses some of the botched efforts spanning more than 20 years.

Constitutional reform is a topic that every now and then surfaces on the agenda only to disappear in a cloud of political rhetoric soon afterwards.

Political parties like talking about changing the Constitution to make it reflect modern society’s needs and aspirations: it makes them sound stately.

But recent political history is replete with efforts that produced a lot of words but very little in terms of action, casting doubt on the willingness of politicians to rise above their immediate partisan concerns.

It has not helped matters that the absolute majority of constitutional changes agreed to by the two major parties concerned the electoral system. Most of these changes happened on the eve of elections to patch up deficiencies in the current electoral system.

A bold effort was undertaken in 1993 by the Nationalist Party when under the stewardship of then general secretary Austin Gatt, it released the document Il-Bidla Tkompli that proposed wide-ranging reforms.

The document was eventually taken up by the government and produced in a White Paper. Among the more radical proposals was the election of the President by a wide electoral college that not only included MPs but also mayors.

Although the public consultation process had started, nothing ever came out of the effort.

During the same period the government also tasked two commissions to draw up changes to the electoral system (the Gonzi Commission) and draft a political party financing law (the Galdes Commission).

Despite the efforts, the conclusions of the commissions were never taken on board by the government claiming it could not go ahead unless it had full consensus from the then Opposition Labour Party.

Yet, on the eve of the 1996 election, an agreement brokered in secret by the two major political parties saw the electoral system change to ensure that in the eventuality of a party winning the election with a relative majority, it would still be guaranteed enough seats to govern if only two parties were elected in Parliament.

The move was widely interpreted as a corrective measure in the eventuality of Alternattiva Demokratika gaining enough votes to prevent the other two parties from obtaining an absolute majority.

Recent political history is replete with efforts that produced a lot of words but very little in terms of action

AD contested its first election in 1992, obtaining more than 4,000 votes, the best showing by any third party since the 1960s. Its growing stature at the time left the two major parties wondering how AD would perform in the 1996 election that forced them to re-jig the electoral system.

Constitutional change remained on the backburner for a long time after that period.

It was in May 2005 that the subject was revisited, but again the talks only concentrated on changes to the electoral system. Talks between then Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi and then Opposition leader Alfred Sant were described as fruitful and positive.

Eventually, the talks were widened to include AD but a year later an agreement on a fair electoral system reached stalemate. The Constitution was changed to ensure Gozo remained a single electoral district, something both the PN and the PL agreed with.

But again, some months before the 2008 election the two major parties agreed a constitutional change to award parties elected in Parliament extra seats to ensure proportionality between votes and seats.

The ball rolled forward to 2009 when Dr Gonzi, in his second term as prime minister, proposed a parliamentary select committee to discuss important reforms, including changes to the Constitution.

During his second term as prime minister (2008-2013), Lawrence Gonzi (above left) proposed a parliamentary select committee to discuss reforms, including changes to the Constitution. The Labour Party, by now under the leadership of Joseph Muscat (above right), agreed to take part in the committee but months later withdrew its participation in protest after a dispute over a parliamentary vote.

The Labour Party, by now under the leadership of Joseph Muscat, agreed to take part in the committee but months later withdrew its participation in protest after an altercation over a parliamentary vote.

Any hope of constitutional reform seemed lost, though PN MP Franco Debono did make an unsuccessful attempt to revive matters later on in the legislature when he presented a Private Members’ Bill that covered myriad legal changes, including amendments to the Constitution.

President George Abela tried to rekindle the debate in April 2013 by dedicating the President’s Forum, a discussion platform, to constitutional reform.

By then the Labour Party was elected to government with a mandate to set up a Constitutional Convention to discuss and propose reforms. Dr Muscat appointed Dr Debono to chair the convention and draw up its terms of reference.

The move to appoint Dr Debono, who had brought down the previous government by voting against the Budget, was met with resistance by the PN.

Since then, the Constitutional Con-vention has not seen the light of day, with constitutional reform making it to the agenda last week as part of a heated partisan exchange.

Cynics can be excused for not holding their breath.

kurt.sansone@timesofmalta.com