A general interdiction is nothing, says Vince
Vince thinks it's just a mosquito bite
Vince Farrugia – speaking not as a Nationalist Party politician this time, but as secretary-general of the GRTU – dismissed as no more than “a mosquito bite” the general interdiction imposed by the court on the former VAT Department employees who took bribes and organised scams, and on those who bribed them. As he put it, if you’re not in business, then a general interdiction means nothing and those VAT Department employees should have been sent to prison. He failed to let us know whether he thinks that those who did the bribing should be imprisoned too. But then for all I know they might be members of his union.
Our Vince might not have understood just how revealing his words are of his way of thinking. What we have here is just more of the same mindset that led those shopkeepers, restaurateurs and importers to think nothing of paying bribes to VAT Department employees. They clearly did not understand the moral implications or the legal ones, and are probably reeling from shock at having had their right to vote, to hold public office, to take loans and to enter into contracts permanently removed under a general interdiction by the court.
They did not think bribes were a big issue. Everybody’s doing it and everybody’s always done it, they probably told themselves and others. And our Vince does not think a general interdiction is a big issue unless you’re in business. The attitudes of all these men are symptomatic of the very same malaise, but I will not spell out what that malaise is because I don’t want our Vince getting all hot and heavy and losing his wig in the turbulence.
Those men who paid the bribes appear to have thought that it was a sort of magnified version of tipping the head waiter to get the best table in a restaurant. In other words, they have a disturbingly poor understanding of the immorality of their behaviour, and how the law views that immorality. (Those who asked for the bribes, on the other hand, seem to have been well aware of the nature of their crimes.)
And Vince Farrugia has a disturbingly poor understanding of the nature of shame, and of why a perpetual general interdiction is a life sentence far worse than a prison term, a gross and permanent humiliation. He thinks it is bothersome only if you have to trade and must enter into contracts. The badge of shame that comes with permanent disenfranchisement and the reduction of one’s legal status almost to that of a child seem to mean little or nothing to him.
I don’t know what’s more worrying: a trader who owes €834 in fines and would rather pay a bribe to get involved in a scam, risking perpetual interdiction and the humiliation that goes with it, than pay his rather small dues, or the secretary-general of a trade union who thinks that a general interdiction is nothing more than a hassle for traders who can’t enter into contracts. Perhaps it’s a form of amoral pragmatism. Perhaps it’s just plain ignorance. Either way, it’s not comfortable to look at.
Back to school
It’s back to school with Astrid Vella and the rest of the gang at Flimkien Ghal Ambjent Ahjar. After a quiet August, they’ve pulled out their pencil-cases again and have come up with this: “Parliaments in other European capitals such as London, Paris and Rome are not set on busy shopping streets; the siting of Parliament facing the shopping arcade and social housing block of Freedom Square is undignified and lacking in prestige.”
Well, if it’s dignified enough for the city’s main gate, then it’s dignified enough for parliament house. The problem isn’t with putting parliament there, but that somebody chose to stick social housing flats there earlier. I suppose the people at FAA could start offering postgraduate courses in circular thinking. The one course I won’t recommend they teach is ‘how to pipe down when you know you’ve lost the argument and the sound of scraping at the bottom of that barrel is even louder than your megaphone’.
Misplaced sympathy
I had very little time for Stefania Carabott, the woman styled by the newspapers as The Simshar Widow, when she starred on BondiPlus some months ago trying to pluck at the nation’s heartstrings. I had this nagging suspicion that what she was really trying to do was get a handle on that house she was living in, because she was faced with threats of eviction.
The final straw for me was when she whined: “I never thought I would be reduced to living on a widow’s pension at 27.” It didn’t seem to occur to her for one moment that, if the widow’s pension isn’t to her liking, she could do what other childless, unmarried 27-year-olds of both sexes do, get a job and earn her living.
Now Malta Today has tried to rev up our pity with a story headlined ‘Destitute, Simshar widow begs for charity’ (heaven knows why they stuck that comma in; they might have had one going spare). Why any single, childless, able-bodied woman of sound mind, still in her 20s, should be ‘destitute’ in Malta is beyond me. Temporarily dysfunctional after a tragedy, perhaps – but destitute?
The newspaper reported that Mrs Carabott is now begging, trading on sympathy for her plight as the widow of a drowned fisherman – as though we’re living in 1900. She’s doing the rounds of shops in Sliema, accosting customers and shopkeepers with a memorial prayer-card for her dead husband (a ‘santa’), and telling them: “I am Noel Carabott’s widow. I have many bills to pay and I’m going to lose my home. Please help me, but if you can’t then never mind.”
Malta Today appears to believe that we should be shocked at the circumstances to which this woman has been reduced, but my reaction is: why am I not surprised?
This article is published in The Malta Independent on Sunday today.
28 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Does anyone have statistics on how many interdicted people received a pardon in the past 20 years? Possibly this information should reveal after how many years the interdiction was granted.
Most of those who voted for Vince for MEP must have been writing in another English newspaper, agreeing that the sentences handed out are a travesty of justice. Why am I not surprised? Because if Vince who occupies a prominent position within the GRTU thinks that way, most elves must think he is right!
Surely, Daphne, you could not have possibly missed the start of FAA’s second paragraph in their comments of yesterday: “It is not within the remit of Flimkien għal Ambjent Aħjar (FAA) to give an opinion on the design of the Parliament building”. So true! So why did they?
The Shimshar tragedy raised a lot of questions which remain unanswered for some strange reason, but for Ms. Carabott to try and capitalize on the inconclusive story amounts to no more than a manipulation of the empathy of the naive few.
I still firmly believe that a suitable prison sentence should have been meted out to the offenders for such horrendous fraud – people have been sent to prison for much lesser demeanours. Knowingly conspiring to defraud the state of millions of Euros cannot be dismissed as a mistake, or a crime of passion. By such a decision the court (could it be government’s recommendation?) has given out the wrong message to the public, namely that crime does actually pay.
[Daphne – There is separation of powers in Malta. The government cannot recommend anything to the court; indeed, the government is subject to the decisions of the court, and not the other way round.]
I am sure Vince Farrugia understands the seriousness of the general interdiction sentence, but, besides the fact that he probably knows that these people will find ways to continue doing their business (power of attorneys, private agreements, etc to wives, sons or brothers), he is probably also conscious that the predictable presidential pardon will be requested and given, in a few years time.
If FAA are shocked that a Parliament in Freedom Square would be right next to social housing they should keep in mind that the Auberge de Baviere is right next to “id-Diju Balli” and the Sacra Infermeria next to “l-Arcipierku”.
Indeed, of the three it’s the one at city gate that’s in the best state.
29-year-old single mothers also choose to pay for quality child-care and pursue careers, to pay bills (including a mortgage), and to be able to afford a quality life-style including general interest books and trips overseas for ourselves and our children, because being at home all day long is no way for women, who pride themselves on standing on her own two feet, to live.
Yes, I agree that Mrs Carabott could go out and work, including all the ‘single mothers’ eating out of our taxes. Free medicine, free flat, free schooling, free appliances etc. They receive a cheque and spend it on themselves not on their children. This is a country of many false ‘social cases’ and of whiners who do not want to work but want money.
Daphne….”and how the law views that immorality”… The law does not deal with morality – the law deals with legal or illegal acts. Last time I checked morality is the domain of the church not the State.
[Daphne – The law DOES deal with morality. Indeed, it deals with little else. Laws are rooted in morality, otherwise we would have no laws at all. You are an example of why it is so dangerous to teach morality only within the context of religion, which is precisely how it is taught in Malta. Your assumption is that outside religion, all is amoral.]
I don’t see why anyone could imagine that the government recommended a lenient sentence. I heard that the Attorney General is to appeal regarding these sentences.
It must have been a trauma for Mrs Carabott, but lots of people have gone through traumas and returned to work. I feel that if she does start work it would also help her to start leading a normal life once more.
[Daphne – Apparently, she has never worked, and is reluctant to start doing so.]
She’ll never forget her husband, but she can’t expect to spend the rest of her life sitting on an armchair meditating on her loss and being supported financially by the state.
Everybody is disgusted, every where one goes and from all classes. It is now confirmed that our country is a joke and that song ‘pajjiz tal-Mickey Mouse’ should be the national anthem. Do the wives get the sanctions as well?
[Daphne – Obviously not, but if the marriage is governed by community of acquisition, then the spouse of an interdicted person can’t enter into a contract, except a personal one like an employment contract, because the interdicted person would be a party to it. Married people with community of acquisition can’t enter into contracts unilaterally. On the other hand, if the community of acquisition is dissolved to allow the non-interdicted spouse to carry on with contracts etc, then the interdicted spouse has, at law, nothing to do with this, no claim on the profits and no liability for the losses. So basically the non-interdicted spouse can then run off with everything acquired after the community is dissolved, and the interdicted spouse can do nothing to prevent it – so dissolving the community would be a huge risk for the interdicted person. Also, might I remind you that not all the spouses involved are wives, and that wives are not chattels or extensions of their husbands.]
Is Malta going to get the money back? Crimes pays in this country…does the EU which gets part of the VAT know about this? After the Lockerbie release of El Magrathi the USA and others did not think that the courts are separate from the executive.
[Daphne – The courts are separate from the government. The court hands down a sentence, but the government administers the prisons and the head of state can recommend early release or a pardon.]
We all smell a rat and these ridiculous sentences mean much more…only the little man pays taxes in Malta.
[Daphne – On the contrary, the little man doesn’t pay taxes because he falls below the threshold. I really don’t think it is appropriate to tar all business-owners with the same brush because of the few who are corrupt and corrupting. It is like saying that every member of the working-class is a bum and a scrounger who lives off state benefits.]
I believe that any court sentence re VAT fraud should have been tied to / depended on a complete refund of money owed to government, to the regular taxpayers.
@ Daphne
Am I to understand that the courts can comfortably say ” l’etat est nous”?
[Daphne – Obviously not, because Malta is a democracy with separation of powers. Louis XIV of France, on the other hand, was entirely correct in saying that he was the state.]
Well, with a bit of an endeavor, it’s up to the state ( Parliament ) to implement new laws with harsher, biting fines and formulated in such a way, that they would not present any problem for interpretation by our courts.
[Daphne – There appears to be some confusion here. Parliament is not the executive arm of the state. That would be the government. Parliament is the representative body of the citizens.]
The way the government tackled this VAT affair is a blow to the very structure of our society. It’s sad and depressing to honest citizens; fortunately, there are still many of these around.
[Daphne – Is it my imagination or do rather too many people in Malta have a totalitarian approach to running the country? No wonder, then, that roughly half the population thought there was nothing wrong with the Labour years of 1971 to 1987. Malta has separation of powers. The government cannot punish those who are corrupt, other than by sacking them from their positions. Only the courts can do that, after due process. And that is what has happened. If you wish to live in a country where the government punishes perpetrators of crimes such as this, you can emigrate to China.]
Can we, however, imagine the repercussions on the younger generations? They are keenly watching, hearing and judging. What is more sinister they will be tempted, doing worse than their elders.
[Daphne – Believe you me, the younger generation are busy living their interesting lives and don’t give a damn. Most wouldn’t even know about this. A tax fraud case? How very thrilling when you’re 21.]
This pardon/amnesty business which we have been witnessing these last years is pushing the state into the realms of the grotesque. The sins of society are the fault of the state.
[Daphne – Not at all. Society cannot sin. Individuals do. The state can behave in an immoral or amoral way, yes. I agree with you that pardons should be the exception not the rule and that the ongoing situation makes a mockery of justice.]
Those who believe that the sentences meted out so far in the VAT fraud case were all far too lenient should perhaps consider that according to the Times of the 9th September – http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090909/local/arraignments-starts-over-alleged-vat-department-fraud – one person who was found guilty of pocketing the princely sum of Lm200 was sentenced to 2 years in prison suspended for four years, was fined €450 and was perpetually interdicted. Moreover, as result of this sentence, he will almost certainly lose his job.
And then the Somali woman gets 6 months for possessing a false document.
It seems that some people cannot understand that the court of law (and I am saying law instead of justice for a purpose), has to follow the existing law. Within such laws there are strict guidance to what is the maximum fine, prison sentence etc., as well as to how many degrees would the sentence be lowered if say the accused collaborated with the police or pleaded a guilty sentence.
I am not knowledgeable on this particular law, but all laws follow the same rules.
Whenever I come across sentences that might look unjust, I always remember what my late forensic lecturer used to tell us – “the courts are courts of law and not justice.”
Ah, and wasn’t begging illegal?
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2009/02/28/maltese-charity/
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090917/local/vat-fraud-consequences-of-interdiction-lighter-than-thought
Daphne, I would ask you to read this. An interdiction on someone who is not a government employee is just that. A mosquito bite. Vince was saying that punishments should have been harsher, and that the “big spider” behind all this web of fraud and deceipt would also be caught.
Looks like Vince may have had a point.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090917/local/legal-anomaly-could-soften-penalty
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090917/local/legal-anomaly-could-soften-penalty
tajjeb ukoll
According to the Times Online today, it looks like Vince was right.
[Daphne – http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090920/local/notaries-at-odds-over-definition-of-interdiction ]
Hey Daphne. Where are you? No input since Monday. I sorely miss your cogent comments, retorts and diatribes. Am suffering severe withdrawal symptoms. Must I return to Maureen Dowd, Peggy Noonan and Anne Coulter?
[Daphne – I was in China and didn’t feel like thinking about Malta.]
Can understand that. Just got in from Switzerland. Hope you had a good time in China. Did you keep your back to the ‘Wall’?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRp1RBXN3aY
D – are you on holiday as your Running Commentary has seemed to slow down somewhat and I am missing it.
[Daphne – Yes, I was. I usually carry on from wherever, but this time I didn’t.]
Am I to understand that the Opposition leader was an hour late…..again?
http://di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=72&Action=1&NewsId=64179&newscategory=36
Daphne, what’s happened to your blog? I’m missing my daily Daphne fix!
Hi Daphne,
It’s been a while. Hope all’s OK.
[Daphne – Yes, it is, thanks.]
Good to have you back. Hope you enjoyed China.
Daphne mhux ahjar ddur dawra madwarek u tara x tamel int .min gie qallek li jiena qatt ma hdimt ghalhekk kont mmur nittallab.j Alla int bl lsien kiefer li ghandek ma tghaddix minn dak li ghaddejt jiena ghax issa xbajt nisma stejjer minn ghandek ax donnok taf kollox int biex jkollok x tikkumenta.