Are we really supposed to believe that was a mistake? Even that is no excuse: a government which publishes a short legal notice without checking it is beyond incompetent
There’s a quite shocking discrepancy between the Maltese and English versions of the government’s legal notice which amends its sale-of-citizenship law yet again.
The English version says that passport applicants must rent a house or flat for five years or buy one and hang on to it for five years. That’s in line with the conditions the government spoke about earlier.
But the Maltese version gives the mandatory period as THREE years. Jason Azzopardi, who is the Opposition’s spokesman on this subject, pointed out that where there is any discrepancy or ambiguity of meaning between the English-language and Maltese-language versions of a law, it is the Maltese-language version which prevails.
How was the government planning on getting away with this? Ah, but it wasn’t, apparently: it has issued a statement saying that this was a mistake and it will be corrected. Oh, so that’s all right then. We have a government that can’t even write up a short legal notice without a major error of fact, and then over and above that, can’t be fagged to have somebody check it before it is published.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Take a look at this, Daphne. Chinese “investors” accompanied by the SAG. What a joke.
http://www.newsbook.com.mt/artikli/2014/2/6/investituri-cinizi-skortati-mill-sag.14592
Not so much ‘investors’, more likely new, and clandestinely created, Maltese citizens.
Mela mhux zball, dak jghidulu Toni Abela.
They cannot even organize a piss up in a brewery.
Good thing that we will never have to run a war. Automatic defeat.
It is what one could call a sleight mistake.
Konfucju tal-Komunisti jghid:
“Min he*a mexa’, u min ma he*iex inhe*a” !
u
“Ah*i w’nik ghax fid-dinja dak li ssib”!
Dak li tghallem Joseph minn ghand ic-Ciniz Komunist Konfucju.
They cannot simply correct it. Remember Owen Bonnici just yesterday insisting that a legal notice cannot be amended? It can only be repealed.
They can’t even do a due diligence exercise in the proof reading let alone in the applicant screening process. Nistghu inserrhu rasna.
Bloody amateurs, lurching from one screw-up to the next.
I think they tried to pull a fast one hoping that the MPs who bothered to read the legal notice would just read the English version. There have been other cases of such discrepancies (although these were genuine mistakes) in the past which went unnoticed for a number of years but they never regarded such important aspects of a legal notice,
It is even worse because the government was warned in advance that the legal notice would be under scrutiny. That should have been enough to make them carry out at least a double check before publication.
But we cannot expect any better, can we?
Given the fact that they had to issue a press release on the appointment of six, no seven, no six, no seven, new superintendent, bla,bla,bla, in the police force 3 times, I will actually give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Having said that, given that labourintes are going to misunderstand what I am trying to say, because they are stupid….. THIS IS NOT A COMPLIMENT, IT DOES NOT MEAN I ACCEPT IT, IT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS OK….IT JUST MEANS YOU ARE INCOMPETENT AND NOT FIT TO GOVERN
That’s because everything is done with haste to get the money rolling, too bad we are the ones to pay the price.
Was the EU Commission presented with both versions of the government legal notice?
Don’t these people know their numbers yet? They mixed up 5 and 3 and the police commissioner mixed up 6 with 7 assistant commissioners.Go back to Sant’s repeater class
http://www.arabianbusiness.com//for-sale-eu-passports-537637.html