Trying to prove they’re doing something, or what?
Are they addressing the nation on Malta’s entry into World War III? No, they’re announcing the lifting of the statute of limitations on crimes involving corruption and politicians.
The nature of a press conference should be proportionate to the news announced. Had the previous government lifted the statute of limitations on crimes of corruption involving politicians, the Minister of Justice would simply have spoken to the press while walking out of parliament, and the prime minister wouldn’t have got involved at all.
But when this government lifted the statute of limitations yesterday, it called a formal press conference addressed by the prime minister, the deputy prime minister, the Minister of Justice, Police, the Army and Broadcasting, and his parliamentary secretary.
So Joseph Muscat, Louis Grech, Suor Emanuela Mallia tal-Kcina (ma kellix chance tilbes il-velu, miskina) and Owen Bonnici lined up in a row and the prime minister actually brought out his election campaign white lectern and plonked it down at the Palace, so that no hostile journalist could get too confident.
It was absolutely pathetic. More pathetic still is the failure of these crap-artists – I’m sorry, but the term was made for them – to understand basic protocol and procedure. It is the Minister who should have announced this, not his PS Owen Bonnici (and certainly not the PM).
But I imagine they are keen to preserve the idiotic fiction that the Justice and Police portfolios are ‘separate’ because Manuel Mallia has got Owen Bonnici in his ministry looking after the former – even though the portfolio is his and not Owen’s.
So much for all the fuss they made, to egg that Franco Debono on, about justice and the police both being handled by Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici in the last government.
And speaking of Franco Debono, every time I visit Valletta I see him strutting about like a Sicilian hustler from the lower orders, cornering small groups of men to bend their ears, like somebody trying to broker a deal on a stolen car or worse. He has no gravitas at all, and it is impossible to take either him, or the work he is being paid to do, seriously.
He doesn’t seem to be doing it at all. When, exactly, does he spend time in his office reviewing Malta’s entire body of laws and the Constitution?
I have the strangest feeling that if and when Debono doesn’t deliver, we won’t be told about it.
24 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Ahjar Joseph Muscat jghidilna x’qed jaghmel biex jirranga il-bagit qabel Ottubru, wara il-krizi finanzjarja li ga dahhalna fieha bil-kapricci tieghu malli telgha fil-gvern, u bl-inkompetenza tal-Ministru tal-Finanzi Edward Scicluna li appunta hu.
And what’s with Deborah tad-Divorzju, sporting that “Duluri” look? Doesn’t look too thrilled.
@ Big Daddy – None of them look thrilled – they are trying to look serious
She is probably regretting her switch with the “moviment”.
After all that BS talk about a progressive liberal Labour movement, all we end up with are these clowns who look like they’re having trouble with their bowel movements.
For all the black huumour perpetuated here, and I just love it, I am concerned about all the theatrics.
I get the feeling of a subtle reminder of Hitler’s early propaganda with Mein Kampf (Malta li Rrid Nghix Fiha), media evolution focusing on the petty images (basta jidhru) and the high society of Eva Braun.
If this lot had to be something they should at least be bolsheviks rather than fascist.
Bolsheviks? And what about Michelle and her high society?
You know what colourful language Mintoff used. (remember il-linfa ?) I can imagine what he would have said about her high society.
[Daphne – He was quite partial to some parts of high society himself, vic, especially if they came wearing skirts or jodhpurs. As for the Bolsheviks – no. They are more like Muscovites but without the Croesus effect or the looks.]
Eva Braun had her high society gatherings in the mountains. ‘Mrs Michelle Muscat’ has hers at Girgenti Palace.
Mintoff had his aboard his yacht.
Baxxter, are you referring to this?
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Karmenu-Vella-with-Dom-Mintoff-Silvio-of-La-Spiaggia-and-Valletta-footballer-Carlo-Seychell5.jpg
Having the press conference at the palace, while there’s an exhibition on – Mattia Preti – meant that any group of visitors was barred from visiting the exhibition during the press conference.
When Franco Debono doesn’t deliver? He already delivered…. remember? His appointment is nothing but an excuse to pay him from our pockets.
You made the PM and his lectern come out of hiding by asking where he has run off to in a previous post.
They can’t organise the proverbial piss-up in a brewery.
Do these people realise that the election campaign is over?
The prime minister and ministers are still calling press conferences in public places and rarely if ever in their ministries.
Is the Labour Party, or someone else, charging a fee for the use of that lectern? Maybe we’ve found some more cost-cutting for the Professor of Mintoffianomics?
Is it just my tired dirty mind or does that lectern really look like an oversized phallic symbol?
Yepp, it represents what we have to live with for the next five years.
May I comment about the Times report re the law just announced in this press conference.
Mr Muscat is quoted as saying ” …but those politicians who committed corruption in the PAST will, from now on, be very worried because their sins will not be forgotten”.
The report further adds “The law does not explicitly say it can be applied retroactively but is worded in a way that leaves it up to the courts to decide”.
If Muscat wanted the removal of the statute of limitations to apply to corruption committed PRIOR (“PAST”) to the enactment of this law, why did he not specify this in the law?
Is it because he did not want to be censored by the European Court, for enacting a law with retroactive effect? It is well known that no law can be effective retroactively.
So why is the retroactive element being left to the courts?
Is he expecting the courts to risk being censured by the European Court?
.
I expect a prime minister to lead, not hide behind other institutions.
Then it is most probable that this law has no purpose about the past. The ECHR would most likely not accept that a law that removes the statute of limitations be used to reopen past acts.
oops, this was a reply to Fenka.
@Baxxter 31 May at 10:50 pm
The cheap skate did not have a yacht. He borrowed one. And he very nearly blew it up when he sailed unannounced and uninvited straight into an Albanian minefield and had to be rescued.
Pity he didn’t hit a mine.
Just saw Owen Bonnici wearingg brand new shiny lace ups.