Actually, Mr Prime Minister, that’s you being played at your own game
The prime minister has said that the Opposition leader has “failed another credibility test” because he has refused to take questions from Labour MPs in the breach of privilege complaint which the prime minister raised against him in parliament.
Muscat had raised that breach of privilege complaint against Busuttil when Busuttil accused him of using his influence with the new Police Commissioner to halt the investigation and prosecution of John Dalli in the case which led to his being kicked out of the European Commission.
When the breach of privilege complaint was raised, Busuttil correctly said that it was completely uncalled for and revealed his opposite number’s intolerant attitude towards criticism which, as a prime minister in parliament, he should accept gracefully.
Busuttil was right in that. Over the years, prime ministers Fenech Adami and Gonzi were subjected to the most abject insults and criticism by members of the Opposition and even, in Gonzi’s case, by a couple of truly vile individuals on his own benches, with one of them comparing him to Adolf Hitler and saying that he is the devil incarnate. But no breach of privilege complaint was ever raised. Nor was the speaker of the House requested to intervene (though this should have happened, not to save the prime minister from insult, but to save parliament from being dragged through the mire by the shouting and screaming of a vulgar savage in need of psychiatric treatment).
And now Busuttil is right again to refuse to subject himself to the travesty of a breach of privilege complaint in the context of a kangaroo court in which the presumed victim is also the judge and jury.
This breach of privilege system flies in the face of the Constitution of Malta and should have been scrapped a long time ago. As the Opposition leader told the prime minister, he had said exactly the same thing outside parliament (things said in parliament are ‘privileged’ and not subject to civil or criminal proceedings for libel) and the prime minister was free to take the normal, democratic route of suing him in the civil courts.
But he didn’t – which says a great deal. Using the anti-Constitutional breach of privilege suits his undemocratic and intolerant purposes better.
I’m glad the Opposition leader has refused outright to subject himself to this farce. Imagine the loss of dignity if he colluded willingly in putting himself in the dock of a kangaroo court in which he is ‘tried’ by his own enemies.
Perhaps the Nationalist Party is learning at last that the only way to deal with those who set traps for you to walk into is to play them at their own game.
21 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2014-06-06/news/opposition-leader-fails-another-credibility-test-government-5356191745/
‘..In a democracy, the Opposition Leader had responsibilities to carry, the government said…’
That’s right, even more so when a government refuses to uphold the rule of law.
Meantime, Muscat can’t get himself to answer clearly what he intends to do with Farrugia Sacco.
And he can’t get himself to reply questions about the secret agreement he signed with Communist China in 2010 and to questions about Henley & Something. Now there is loss of credibility for you.
I think he was quite clear; he will consider impeachment once he has exhausted all remedies. So let’s see, appeal – 1-2 years, European Court of Human Rights – 2-5 years. Nope no intention of touching him by this August.
Shall we say why, or do people not recall the Farrugia Sacco press conferences and leaks?
Muscat had declared that after the conclusions of the Justice Commission’s investigation, he would proceed with the impeachment motion. He never did even when the Justice Commission concluded and published its report.
Not just re Farrugia Sacco, but also IIP (Henley) and Enemalta (Chinese contract) among other things
Another rendition of the Charles Demicoli case which went all the way up to the European Court of Human Rights and to our surprise always under the Labour government.
How pathetic that 30 years after Mhux Fl-Interess Tal-Poplu editor Charles Demicoli was dragged before parliament for ‘breach of privilege’, these guys are still stuck in the myth of the golden years of KMB and Mintoff’s Mao Tse Tung spin off.
No wonder we get a lot of students studying psychology in Malta: the Maltese mind must be truly intriguing. I bet they must have a lucrative profession when considering more than half the population voted Labour.
Someone with a first degree in psychology does not a psychiatrist make.
I reckon that with Labour’s reasoning, Busuttil is being negative here as well.
I suggest that all members of the Opposition stand up and repeat the same words that Simon Bussuttil said, and see what Joseph Muscat’s reaction will be.
I’m eager to listen to Kessler giving his testimony on the 4th of July.
This is going to be a boomerang for Joseph Muscat.
Isn’t it scandalous that parliament will reconvene at the end of October?
And when Muscat was in Opposition he had criticised the PN government for taking a long ‘summer’ recess.
Kemm ilu jiccargja pozittiv, Joseph sar jixxokkja. Jixxokkjak jekk tmiss mieghu. Staqsi lill Joe Cuschieri. Jixxokkjak jekk tkun minn ta’ gewwa tahdem mieghu. Staqsi lit-tabib Farrugia.
Jixxokkjak jekk tkun trid tahdem mieghu. Staqsi lill Kummissarju Rizzo u l-Brigadier li kellna.
Jixxukkjak jedd tisimghu jitkellem. Staqsi lin-nies ta’ Bormla kemm hadhom lura fi zmien il-kavallieri. Jixxukkjak jekk taqra dak li jghidu fuqu. Aqra x`hawn miktub aktar il-fuq.
Mela l-prim ministru nesa li hu stess ma resaqx quddiem il-kumitat ghax mar Milan jara loghba football?
Nahseb Kurt Farrugia mhux gismu biss ghandu qasir, imma anke l-memorja.
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/35374/joseph-muscat-chooses-milan-match-over-privileges-committee-report-20140220#.U5LPM_lTWSo
It is okay for the prime minister to give Farrugia Sacco all the legal opportunities available to clear his name but for Dr Busuttil the only way out is through parliament. Double standards galore !
Dr. Busutill knows how to deal with Muscat u jaaf jaqlih b’zejtu
Judge Farrugia Sacco is contesting procedures on impeachment in court. If breach of privilege procedures can be declared unconstitutional, why has Dr Busuttul not filed a case in court?
[Daphne – Because it will make him look like Farrugia Sacco: a guilty man using the law against itself. People don’t understand these finer points and perception conts for a great deal. Similarly, when I challenged the police about my arrest on the eve of the general election last year, people just couldn’t understand that this was a legal stand because their actions were anti-Constitutional.]
If anyone feels that a law or other action or procedures are anticonstitutional then one should contest these in court. If say I feel that some traffic regulations are anticonstitutional as they restrict my freedom of movement, can I just disobey the law and expect impunity?
[Daphne – Yes, because that is the only way you can challenge them. Unfortunately, with the procedural system the way it is, you have to break the law to get a court ruling that changes it. Let’s take the case I mentioned: the day of silence on the eve of an election. The only way the press, or any individual member of the press, can do anything about that is to break the law, get arrested, then file a Constitutional case for illegal arrest & c & c, obtaining a ruling which will then make it clear to the police that any further such arrests are illegal and that/because preventing free discussion about political matters on the eve of an election (or at any other time) goes against the Constitution, which does indeed provide for restrictions on free expression, but in very narrow circumstances to do with national emergencies, time of war and similar.]
If breach of privilege procedures are unconstitutional, why has a Parliament filled to the brim with lawyers never scrapped these procedures?
[Daphne – Because they imagine that one day they themselves might find it convenient to use them. And you don’t have to be a lawyer to know that the system goes against the Constitution of Malta. I’m not a lawyer. Similarly, despite not being a lawyer, I know that the ‘day of silence’ before a general election is anti-Constitutional too, because it is a restriction on free speech that is not provided for by the Constitution (war, etc).]
If our MPs are so self-centred and short-sighted, then no MP should complain if he or she is subject to breach of privilege procedures.
Nevertheless an ethics committee based on the UK model was proposed to regulate these issues.