Max, if the opinions you freely express are racist you should not complain that you are labeled racist.

The key point is the criminalisation of the act.

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.

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.

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

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.

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!

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.