Malta is my home and the home of my family. Your vote affects me. From the opinion polls, it seems the outcome of the election will be decided by the undecided.
The right to vote is a sacrosanct right. In normal circumstances, I would argue that we are free to vote as we wish, emotionally or in line with our traditional ties, for the common good or for our self-interest, or not to vote at all. I have always voted for the Nationalist Party, being the party closest to my beliefs, but have never been judgemental on how others vote and I do not appreciate or approve of the term “switchers”. To disparage someone because of the way he voted, is to diminish the meaning of the right to vote.
Malta is not living through normal times. We must reflect deeper on the meaning of the right to vote and to consider whether this right has become a duty and what this duty means.
On Saturday, the citizens of Malta have been invited to cast their vote. In normal circumstances an election should be a competitive process, possibly tense but ultimately a normal event and once over, life goes on. In the upcoming election, the stakes are higher and go beyond the right to vote in accordance with one’s own wishes and interests. The stakes are how to bring Malta back to normality. In these circumstances, I must strongly argue that the right to vote no longer remains just a right but becomes a duty which must be exercised in a manner which in one’s conscience serves the common good. It must be used to bring Malta back to normality; for corruption and suspicion of corruption to be wiped out, for justice, peace and solidarity to prevail, for Malta’s reputation and credibility to be restored, in favour of the rule of law and the proper functioning of the Constitution and the constitutional bodies, to declare Malta a proud and reputable member of the European Union. This duty applies to all voters but more importantly it does not leave room for the undecided. It is time to decide and take responsibility.
The stakes are how to bring Malta back to normality
The developments in Malta from the publication of the Panama Papers up to now are well known. Suffice it to acknowledge, and every level-headed person must agree, that the temperament in the country, the accusations, suspicions and reports of corruption, accusations of inaction against those who should have acted, magisterial enquiries, leaks, whistleblowing, adverse international press, denials, lies, distrust and antagonism which exist are not the norm for Malta. Even if you are cynical of politicians and the media or not interested in politics, it is hard to deny that Malta should never have been allowed to come to this present state of abnormality.
The Prime Minister has seriously failed his political and moral obligation towards the Maltese by allowing matters to get out of hand in this manner. When hard facts were published showing that the chief of staff and minister Konrad Mizzi had secret companies in Panama and elsewhere political decency and moral respect for the people of Malta and Europe required that they resign or be asked to resign. By his own admission, the Prime Minister took a decision, for which he is willing to accept political responsibility, to keep them on because he and the country needed them.
The Prime Minister chose exigency over principle and morality. This decision and supervening circumstances led to a sequence of events which built its own momentum and is now totally out of control. Had the Prime Minister been guided by principle and morality and not exigency, had the appropriate institutions and bodies been seen to act with courage, impartially and efficiently, had the rule of law been effective, had transparency and good governance been practised, then we may have had shocks and upheavals but normality would have returned, as it did when in the past corruption was discovered, investigated and tried.
Will the outcome of the election bring Malta back to normality? A Labour victory will not bring about change and the political price the Prime Minister was willing to pay when he chose exigency over principle and morality must now be paid.
On the other hand, Simon Busuttil, backed by the Forza Nazzjonali, is promising good governance, a clean government, zero tolerance for corruption and constitutional reform to give bite to the police and appropriate institutions to be able to act efficiently, impartially and independently. He is promising not to let exigency take priority over principle and morality. I believe that this will lead Malta back to normality.
The cynical or the undecided will reply that Busuttil and the Forza Nazzjonali may fail on their promises. I think not, but who knows. I shall judge that in five years’ time; for now I shall follow my conscience, my analysis, my instincts and take responsibility for my decision.
I am fully aware that committed Nationalists will criticise this article because I have been moderate and not outspoken enough. Committed Labourites will probably discard all I said as biased and nonsense. That leaves the undecided. If this article helps one undecided voter to cast his or her vote to bring Malta back to normality, then I believe it was worth the time and effort.
Pierre Attard is a notary.