How free are we to speak?
Published:
March 23, 2014 at 10:05am
I urge you all to read The Sunday Times of Malta’s leading article (editorial) today, on the subject of the increasingly threatening atmosphere caused by the inability of some politicians to take criticism, jibe and mockery, causing them to resort to the courts, the police or, like the prime minister, parliamentary sanctions against rival politicians.
17 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140323/editorial/editorial-how-free-are-we-to-speak.511746
The politicians chose not to attend. That speaks volumes.
The matter of criminal libel actually puts us at odds with our international obligations. Malta has been repeatedly chided by international bodies (including the council of Europe and the OSCE) about how this law restricts the freedom of expression in Malta. Unsurprisingly, Russia is another repeat offender in this regard.
For your info, libel is not a criminal offence in Russia, unlike in Malta.
http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/07/16/russia-criminal-libel-law-blow-free-expression
http://jurist.org/paperchase/2012/07/russia-president-signs-law-re-criminalizing-libel-and-slander.php
Please check your facts
Max is right. The article you cite uses the word “libel” in its British or American sense, i.e. slander. In Maltese Law, libel is something altogether different. Like calling someone a clown. That, according to our venerable ligijiet ta’ Malta written by clown MPs and applied by attorneys, judges and magistrates with their heads up their arses, is libellous. In fact, I’ve just committed libel myself.
The key point is the criminalisation of the act.
Joseph Muscat will read this as a licence to be overtly offensive.
Think hard about it. The intimidation is not aimed primarily at the formal opposition as this is counter productive in the long run. In reality it is intended to silence dissidents within the Labour fold. Look at the carrot and stick strategy used on Labour local councils so far in the LNG tanker matter. Look at the threats made to Marlene Farrugia and her professional work.
http://www.independent.com.mt/mobile/2014-03-23/news/opposition-should-apologise-for-what-it-did-to-south-of-malta-pm-4354048000/
Rewriting history at every chance and the sad part of this is that many just accept everything he reads off his teleprompter as undeniable fact.
We are definitely not allowed to express our opinions freely when it comes to issues of illegal immigration witbout being labeled a racist
Max, if the opinions you freely express are racist you should not complain that you are labeled racist.
She isn’t.
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-03-23/news/miriam-dalli-i-was-never-against-eu-membership-4348313601/
“The people voted and their decision is to be respected; the main question today is who is in a better position to work for our country within the EU. I believe that the Labour Party is best suited to transform disadvantages into opportunities.”
No it wasn’t, Labour had preempted the result of that referendum by stating the result didn’t count, that what mattered would have been the electoral result. Such was the arrogance that it was believed the voter would rescind their wish to form part of the EU to vote their party into government.
It is not only politicians who are trying to suppress the freedom to hold and to express an opinion in the press or elsewhere.
At this very moment half a dozen commenters in the TOM are being taken to court by the police on behalf of some members of the FKNK because these brave “men with guns” complained that they felt threatened by an expression of opinion in favour of CABS assistance to the police in providing photographic evidence of illegal hunting activities!
We are eventually living in a state which lacks democracy and freedom of speech. To justify my argument, I am listing a number of facts and reasons, as follows.
1. Some of the best administrators, including some who supported PL but weren’t looked at so well by JM, lost their role and were assigned to other posts according to the Government’s will.
2. Many civil servants, including myself, cannot open our mouth, not even within the structures of our own place of work, much less airing our views on newspapers or through social media. There exist clear threats, even though some of them have to be read in the looks of the new PL tyrants who want to make their say felt and accepted without discussion. Only God knows what would happen if all those suffering from such subtle dictatorship had to tell the full truth.
3. Repercussions are no novelty for workers who need to earn their living in some government’s department or sector.
4. The PL Government lied, and it did so unashamedly. Just to mention one instance of such lying, I just repeat the stupid lie ‘Malta Taghna Lkoll’, which sounds worse than a lie. JM consciously ignores all the false promises he had made to become powerful and arrogant, together with his closest circle of incompetent ministers. Can anyone dare oppose him publicly at the risk of losing one’s livelihood?
5. Listen to PL speakers (not without unbearable pain caused by their fictional stories), and just imagine if anyone who works with the government should dare utter just a few sensible comments against government policies or general issues. That person will be immediately beheaded.
No, we are NOT free to share our views in public. That’s why blogs like Daphne’s are a way out to bring the PL government to shame for its disgusting attitude and lies.
What is actually needed is the change in the law on libel. The most awkward thing about libel law in Malta is not the fact that it is considered to be a criminal offence, but the definition of the libel law itself. According to Maltese law the truth cannot constitute defense against libel charges. No other country has the law like that. Meaning that if journalist or whoever publishes something about someone which turns out to be a true fact and which can be proven to be the truth, it will not constitute a libel.
Unfortunately this editorial contains mistaken assertions and illogical comments.
Criminal libel exists in most countries including many European countries. The European Court of Human Rights has held that that criminal libel does not infringe human rights. However the court condemned severe punishments as imprisonment for such a crime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Europe
An increase in civil damages, as happens in other countries, appears justified. However high damages can seriously cripple the media which has limited financial resources and therefore undermines press freedom.
I think the saying that comment is free but facts are sacred is still valid. Therefore when the media, as happened in The Times editorial on Mr Speaker, distorts facts, it is itself betraying press freedom.
The issue of freedoms and their restrictions is debated on an international level as in the case of spying by the NSA.
Today there is much more freedom of expression also due to the new social media. However the abuse of freedom of expression has also grown. In my view the real threat to freedom of expression is not coming from the actions of repressive governments but from the abuse of freedom of expression.