Comments on: Good grief, they spoke the word

By: me

me — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:09:04 +0000

Let us expand a bit;
Is it discriminatory to have a foreigner who has done a sex change abroad and the fact goes undisputed in Malta, maybe even marrying locally without questions and a local has to go through all the unimaginable summersaults because the facts are known by the registry?

Even that is a change of legal status

By: me

me — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:01:12 +0000

@freethinker
I wouldn’t know. It is a query I’m doing. My guess would be something that has to do with equal rights or discrimination.
My question is:
Is it discriminatory to have a couple who acquired a legal status under Maltese law to have that legal status changed by a foreign country that is automatically recognised by Maltese law on the basis that couple ‘a’ have the financial means and can and couple ‘b’ don’t have and cannot ?

Any ideas?

By: freethinker

freethinker — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:51:46 +0000

@me: Which article of the Constitution would you cite if you were to institute the hypothetical case you have in mind?

By: David Buttigieg

David Buttigieg — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:39:48 +0000

@All,

An interesting comment that has nothing to do with divorce –

“Women can be fun and serious at the same time – men do not have that fluidity and are better at compartmentalising their emotions – which is why they make much better serial killers!”

By: David Buttigieg

David Buttigieg — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:37:38 +0000

@Corinne

“That depends on how the law is drawn up – if at all. If you want to put a spoke in somebody’s wheel, you’re bound to find one.”

And we Maltese are experts at that …..

By: David Buttigieg

David Buttigieg — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 08:34:04 +0000

@Daphne,

Thank you for explaining that, it is what I was trying to get at, basically one spouse should not prevent the other from “leaving” or re-marrying (civilly of course).

I would hope that WHEN divorce is introduced here something along the British lines is implemented. Otherwise I can already see the pique and blackmail from the “jilted” spouse.

@Freethinker,

Let me assume we are both misunderstanding each other. As a practising Catholic (even though in favour of divorce legislation) I will never “recognise” a divorce. But if my marriage (God forbid) had to break down and my wife divorced me (legally or civilly) then according to law I am divorced. According to my conscience I’m not! My conscience has no bearing on our legal status – agreed.

A divorce is in effect automatically legal, also agreed, but to me personally has no bearing! (Again this obviously does not effect the legal status). By saying legal divorce I am trying to differentiate between a marital status according to law and one according to conscience. Perhaps I used the wrong term, in which case my apologies!

By: me

me — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:04:35 +0000

The term de facto may also be used when there is no relevant law or standard, but a common practice is well established, although not universal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto

By: me

me — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:03:01 +0000

@ freethinker
I accept your veiled insults as a confirmation of your arrogance.
Still I was expecting some comment on whether the administration can be challenged for going against the constitution.

By: freethinker

freethinker — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 21:29:13 +0000

@David Buttigieg. A divorce is a divorce irrespective of whether you recognize its legality or not. Is it too hard to understand? As if court decisions depend on your recognition for their validity. How absurd can you get?

@ME: yes, I’m trying to muster enough acumen to understand you. I admit, it will take me some time to soar to your stratospheric levels of intelligence — I guess I must humbly accept my limitations. In Malta we do not have de facto divorce, as you say. We have a recognition of foreign court decisions on divorce. This is not de facto divorce, but de jure recognition of foreign decisions. Hope you understand (but I darn well doubt it).

By: Daphne Caruana Galizia

Daphne Caruana Galizia — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 18:56:26 +0000

John, I honestly don’t remember any murder case in which the victim’s wife was the suspect but there wasn’t enough proof. Please enlighten me. On the other hand, I remember many, many cases in which men murdered their wives. Some of the most memorable were the man who shot in wife on Ghajn Dwieli road and then shot himself in the leg and pretended they had been ambused; the Gozitan who enticed his estranged wife out for a romantic walk on the cliffs, called her to the edge to look at an unusual bird, and then pushed her off (her body was never found); the man who stabbed his wife more than 20 times while she was lying in their bed with her infant son beside her, and who then went to the lavatory for some bleach to pour over her as she lay writhing in agony on their balcony, having gone there to call for help; I won’t go on, because these things don’t bear thinking about.

@David – I don’t know about the divorce laws of other countries, but in Britain if your spouse doesn’t agree to the divorced, you can get one all the same after two years (I believe it’s two) have elapsed. And the law was changed some years ago to avoid the horrible recriminations that were the result of having to give the judge a reason for your wish to divorce (“she committed adultery”; “he beat me senseless”). Now the British have what’s called ‘no fault’ divorce, which acknowledges the reality that sometimes a marriage just dies, without the parties running around with Russian lapdancers or giving vent to alcoholic violence.