Politicians write and vote on a law which helps them attack journalists

My column in The Malta Independent tomorrow is about the Media and Defamation Bill, and the fundamental absurdity of having politicians write and vote on a law the sole purpose of which is to help them attack journalists – whatever they say to the contrary.

They have used the repeal of the criminal defamation law as a decoy for what it is they really want to do: almost double the ceiling for damages paid in civil libel suits and having libel suits heard by a judge in the superior courts.

Who sues for libel? Mainly legislators. Who gets sued for libel? Mainly journalists.

Legislators will now legislate to give themselves bigger damages pay-outs when they sue journalists successfully. And this is being touted as “improving things for journalists”.

The gist of my piece tomorrow is that today’s Press Act is better for journalists than tomorrow’s Media and Defamation Act. You don’t go to prison for criminal libel, whatever the government’s propagandists say to the contrary. That penalty was removed in 2006. The only reason to repeal that law is ideological, because of the Putinesque spectre of police going after journalists.

The reality is that journalists, if you ask them, would much rather have – obviously – criminal libel and civil libel with a ceiling of 11,850 euros damages, than no criminal libel and civil libel with a ceiling of 20,000 euros damages.

There’s another point: doubling the potential damages will simply encourage more legislators and other politicians to sue more journalists. How does that help journalists? It doesn’t. It helps legislators, the ones who are pushing this law through.

Besides which, there is clearly an agenda behind raising the ceiling to 20,000 euros. In a history of around 500 libel cases decided by the Courts of Justice in Malta, in both the magistrates’ courts and the superior courts, not once have maximum damages been awarded.

The highest amounts awarded now are 3,000 euros, which is a quarter of the maximum possible. And yet they want to double the maximum. There’s something going on beneath the surface and those of us who work in the field had better get our act together and find out what it is.