Yes, that’s it: the right to vote comes with your 18th birthday, not your entry into the electoral roll
At last, the Nationalist Party has taken a stand on a glaring anomaly in our electoral rules. It said at the general council this morning that all 18-year-olds should be given the vote, whether they are on the electoral register yet or not.
The current system has made me cross for years, because it is intrinsically abusive – and illogical, another thing I can’t stand. The right to vote, like all other rights which devolve from one’s enfranchisement as an adult, comes into play on one’s 18th birthday.
If you want to get married at 18, you can do so. You cannot have this right suspended while the authorities put you on a register of people who are 18 and allowed to get married.
This electoral register nonsense comes from the absolute and utter fear which the political parties have of people voting when they shouldn’t – or rather, people voting for the other party when they shouldn’t be voting at all.
The electoral roll is scrutinised in the most ludicrous detail, and the parties demand it. It is produced well in advance of a general election, with the result that anybody who turns 18 between the finalisation of the electoral roll and the general election is not permitted to vote.
This is intrinsically abusive. An 18-year-old citizen of this country has the RIGHT to vote by virtue of his or her age, but is denied the ABILITY to vote because he or she is not on the electoral roll.
We shall now see what the Labour Party, with its fear of loss of control over who gets to vote, has to say about this, whether it is going to be liberal and decent or carry on being oppressive.
Labour has been busy gearing up for the election by filing law suits to have hundreds of people removed from the electoral roll, which effectively means denying them the vote, on the grounds that they are out of Malta and so on.
But in a landmark court judgement in Arnold Cassola’s case, some years ago, the court had ruled that people who are out of Malta for reasons of work and so on might very well have a direct interest in the affairs of the country and who governs it.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
When my son became an Italian citizen, he immediately could vote in the election in Italy.
I know that some countries in the EU are even looking at the option of lowering the voting age from 18 to 16.
In some places you can get married, drink alcohol or legally drive a car at the age of 16 but you can’t vote.
[Daphne – I disagree wholeheartedly with lowering the voting age to 16. Choosing a government does not fall into the same category of things as drinking and driving a car.]
As far as I am aware, most (successful) initiatives in European countries to allow voting from age 16 have been limited to local or at most state-wide elections. In Germany for example, several states allow 16-year olds to take part in municipal elections and 2 (out of 16) states allow them to vote in statewide elections.
Interestingly, it never seemed to make much of a difference. Teenagers overall do not vote that much different from the next-youngest group of voters.
I think voting for 16-year olds is not that bad as long as there is no compulsory voting. We always frown upon this idea of young people voting because we imagine the teenagers at Paceville on a Friday night. But these guys and girls would most probably not vote anyway. Instead, they would be hung over all election day from the night before.
And let’s not forget, a lot of people over 18 are also terribly immature, have no idea about the issues at stake or the policies of the competing politicians or parties. Yet, they can vote. And their vote counts as much as yours. That’s an inherent problem of democracy.
In Malta the voting age issue can be solved quite easily. Being that most vote for the party their parents voted for, a new law should be passed requiring the parents to indicate on the birth certificate, the infant would be voting for, for the rest of his/her life.
This will be most beneficial in three ways:
1. The voting age would be inconsequential and any infant capable of marking a cross on the party of the parents’ choice would be allowed to vote.
2. The declining birth rate will be solved within a decade because then the political parties would compete and produce more children to ensure their party is elected and/or reelected.
3. The economy will receive a boost since there will be a surge in sales of nappies, baby food, clothing and there will be an expansion of daycare centres, and better and more efficient use of our schools, more teachers, etc.
There are adults who do not vote with their brains. The passion of political zealots is only tempered by those that tend to take politics with a pinch of salt.
During the Mintoff regime I lived abroad in an EU country.I voted twice in general elctions held there during the period. The voting papers were sent to me at my place of work.
For all our religious paraphernalia this country sure as hell ‘aint’ got no trust floating around its citizens .
So Gonzi Pn have found that there are a lot of 18 year olds out there who can be fooled into voting PN and need their support because a lot of PN voters who can think for themselves are switching to Labour. Strange that they were not so worried about this ‘glaring anomaly’ during the divorce referendum.
Stranger still, is that the MLP (Mintoff Labour Party) has not pushed for it yet. Is Joseph afraid that 18 year old first time voters at, or heading for tertiary education, would vote NP because an MLP government would change their stipends into loans?
Or, maybe because they will phase out scholarships, courses will be slashed and to qualify for entry to University or MCAST would require vetting by the local MLP club committee or Labour minister?
Supporters of the MLP will rarely switch to NP because the fact that they still support the Socialists is only because the trait is inherited, like DNA is. So, the MLP should feel quite safe in this regard. But Joseph may be thinking that this would be too ‘progressive’?.
The attempts to have people removed from the electoral register because they allegedly are not living in Malta will hopefully be fruitless. In a united Europe, it is perfectly normal for citizens to spend a while abroad, yet still stay connected to their home country emotionally or intellectually.
Also, as a part of Schengen, Malta doesn’t even know where all of its citizens are at any given time or how much time of the year they have spent in Malta or in Italy or France.
If a young Maltese citizen studies in Venice, London or Regensburg, he or she may still know much more about Maltese politics than about the politics of his temporary host country. And if he or she cares to vote from far away, this should be enough evidence of a continued interest in the affairs of one’s home country.
The problem lies in the fact that Maltese citizenship has recently been extended to Maltese born people around the world as well as their offspring.
The idea was a good one – trying to give Maltese emgrants and their children a real sense of being Maltese. Once they have a Maltese passport, there is nothing to stop them coming to Malta, and getting themselves a ID card. The process takes less than 15 minutes.
Someone with enough backing can then finance the flights of enough supporters to swing an election.
In 2006 there were 153,805 Australians claiming Maltese ancestry. A lot of these are eligible for Maltese citizenship, and therefore to vote here if the residency criteria are not enforced.
Abandoning the electoral register system of eligibility has it’s good points, but is in reality a double edged sword that can be abused.
http://normanvella.blogspot.com/2011/08/dawk-l-2800-kannol-bla-krema.html
I can confirm (see Dee above) that a Maltese citizen residing in UK is entitled to vote in a British General Election. Sadly, as a long term resident in Gozo, I am not extended a similar privilege.I wonder why?
If I’m not mistaken, the Maltese residing in Britain have the right to vote given their ex-colonial status.
If Gozo were a Maltese colony, you’d have the vote.
No they don’t. Where did you get this information?
Relatives who had to leave Malta to pursue their medical profession.
Age 18 gives one the right to enter a legal contract automatically.
Therefore it should give one the right to vote automatically. But I doubt Labour will oppose this as they are so liberal and pro-divorce and progressive.