GUEST POST: The nth Republic
Making a few changes to the Constitution does not make for ‘a second Republic’. Joseph Muscat thinks it does – he said so in the electoral campaign when he parked his lectern in the middle of the road at Hal Lija, and now that he’s prime minister he’s appointed Franco Debono to see to it. And then it turns out that it was Franco’s nutty idea all along, and he’s boasting about it on his blog as we speak. Meanwhile, here’s a guest post on this ‘second Republic’ business.
———
The Labour Party manifesto in point 18.13 says: “Inlaqqgħu Konvenzjoni Kostituzzjonali b’rappreżentanza mill-oqsma differenti politiċi u soċjali bil-ħsieb li naġġornaw il-Kostituzzjoni u l-istrutturi demokratiċi, inkluż ir-regoli ta’ kif jopera l-Parlament, bil-għan li nsaħħu d-demokrazija, innaqqsu l-partitokrazija u nwelldu t-Tieni Repubblika”.
What Labour’s saying is really wide enough to mean anything. ‘Updating the Constitution’, ‘strengthening democracy’ and ‘strengthening parliamentary rules’ are not really fundamental.
We’ve already had a select committee led by Speaker Michael Frendo doing just that since 2008, only for Muscat to barge out in 2010.
‘Updating democratic structures’, ‘reducing the power of political parties’ and ‘bringing about the second republic’ might be typical Muscat flatulent talk, but it might also mean something more fundamental. A ‘second’ republic usually comes about after a major political crisis in a ‘first’ republic.
Very often though, even the ‘second’ republic then goes through its own crisis. Germany’s first republic was the Weimar Republic, after which came a certain Adolf Hitler.
The two constitutional crises we’ve had in Malta since independence were both of Labour’s own making. In 1974, Dom Mintoff’s attack on the supremacy of the Constitution led to a constitutional settlement with much goodwill from the Nationalists. And in 1987, constitutional amendments avoided a re-run of the 1981 election result but neutralized Malta.
In recent years, we haven’t had a constitutional crisis. What we’ve seen on the 9th March is actually a vibrant democracy, much improved in these last 26 years, changing government freely and peacefully.
Beyond the pompous talk, the unnecessary ‘second republic’ Muscat talks about might indicate his own fancy of himself as the first elected president with executive powers.
Like many other Labourites, Muscat believes Mintoff’s symbolic achievement was making Malta a republic. Later on in the 1980s, Mintoff also wanted the presidency to have executive power, for example over the Central Bank and the Army. Despite disagreeing with Eddie Fenech Adami becoming President, Muscat might also fancy himself going one better than both Mintoff and Fenech Adami: making the presidency an elected office, giving it political and executive powers and becoming the first such president.
This might be attractive for a presumptuous character like Muscat, but wrong. We have a tried and tested parliamentary system on the Westminster model, with the additional safeguards of a supreme constitution and entrenched fundamental rights. Our political system gives us citizens a clear choice when we want to change the government because we clearly know who the government are and what we need to do to ‘throw the rascals out’, as American historian Carroll Quigley had it: vote for the party in opposition.
With a powerful and executive presidency whose term does not exactly coincide with that of parliament, we would probably end up with periods of ‘cohabitation’ between politicians of diverse parties all sharing power. Political gridlock would ensue, avoiding the hard decisions needed when you want serious, effective government.
Beyond this, Muscat’s ideas of the end of political parties and such other talk are downright dangerous. What we need is, rather, the opposite: stronger institutions representing and working for the collective good, not conceited individual politicians wielding excessive power.
There are many amendments that can be proposed for our constitution. But the really necessary ones are those that keep making the Constitution what every constitution should be: a charter of citizens’ rights to limit politicians’ self-aggrandizing and boastful aims and slogans.
43 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
We will be seeing the relaunch of Benito Mussolini in Malta.
All the ingredients are in the pot.
Yes, many similarities. Must have my black shirts cleaned.
It’s the tide marks from dried sweat that are troublesome with black shirts. Otherwise, a camisa negra works wonders on the dance floor. Never with a rigid arm salute though! You have to feel the movimiento, Harry, let the pasion latina take over. Suavamente does it.
Have taken note of your remarks, Baxxter, and will duly pass them on to my cleaning lady. Appreciate your help.
The major assumption in this piece is that the “new” constitution would opt for the presidential system substituting the parliamentary one. As far as I know, nobody has, so far, suggested that and, in my opinion, no one will suggest that option. I strongly believe the parliamentary system would be retained even if the Head of State might be given additional powers such as those of appointing certain public officers such as judges or members of constitutional bodies like the Broadcasting Authority, Such powers would not translate into a presidential system.
Whether we will have a second republic will depend on whether the present constitution will be amended or whether we will have a freshly written constitution. If the latter would be the case, then, yes, it could be termed a second republic. The case of Germany is an extreme one. The case of France would be less extreme even if it too took place after the Algerian crisis as regards the fifth republic. It is not always necessarily the case that a new republic is created following a major crisis. In our case, the present constitution was “given” to us by the UK and then accepted by the Maltese after the 1964 referendum but the amended 1974 version was only approved by parliament. The way being suggested by Dr. Muscat seems to be a correct and truly democratic one whereby a constituent assembly (being called “convention) would draw up a text following wide-ranging consultation and debate to be approved in a referendum and then enacted by parliament. This would be the ideal model and I cannot see any cogent reasons for objecting to it and, still less, for ridiculing it. It escapes me how you are denigrating it when you do not even know how the process would be carried out.
Comparisons with the UK are not always appropriate. In the UK, Parliament is supreme whereas in our case it is the constitution which is supreme, not parliament. Malta must develop constitutionally in an autoctonous manner now that the umbilical chord with the UK has been severed.
Finally, well-respected lawyers have accepted the notion of a second republic and i would rather hear their opinion that that of persons not trained in the law.
And, as an anonymous Latin spouter, who trained you?
I didn’t ever get the impression that Joseph Muscat wants a freshly written constitution.
That proves the opposite of your argument.
May I ask who these ‘well-respected lawyers’ who have accepted the notion of a second republic are?
Suggesting that we move forward in an autocthonous manner stems from a much commonly held view that we have to invent the wheel.
The umbilical chord with the UK has long been severed through various practices, if only through our way of doing things and our mentality.
Agreed, having to reaffirm some abstract sovereignity, when the crux is the numbers required to sustain it, won’t hold.
Perhaps the Maltese need to ask themselves how come they preferred a ‘government which listens’ instead of one which worked for a 500 million strong market. Aren’t these the ultimate listeners?
Bureaucracy isn’t the problem, not with these taxes, it’s the conceited rethink of our ‘identity’ which can spoil our chances.
If we are what we do, what’s to hold us from doing outside this place?
All I see are testimonials who aren’t at all concerned with the trading potential, only their piece of an internal market verging on the microscopic, which is the movement’s paradox.
To the Owens and Ramonas, will they please subscribe to the idea that those who don’t need a bigger brother, magnanimous to overkill, could very well be the real example to follow?
Defining the state by its institutions, the easy way to decadence. And these would be the liberals.
But you still need the vote of two-thirds of the house, something that I am sure you will never get. Lejber’s notoriety is world wide, for the disrespect of human rights.
I think that this is as far as you will get. With such ideas you have struck a giant.
On the contrary. President George Abela has been advocating increased power to the Presidency for quite some time now.
“The way being suggested by Dr. Muscat… a constituent assembly (being called “convention) would draw up a text… to be approved in a referendum and then enacted by parliament”
legum etc,
Do you know something we don’t know?
Referendum first, two-thirds majority later?
Why should one call our state a ‘second republic’ if nothing of substance is going to change?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130326/editorial/labour-s-most-divisive-appointment.462957
Legum justorum esse opertet – vere sine has liberi esse non possumus. Amicus Plato, magis amica Veritas.
In simple English, laws are to be obeyed only when they are just – that’s what makes for true freedom. Even if Plato himself asserts what is not true, then one has to follow truth, not him.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130326/letters/Second-Republic.463009
Will I be able to install Republic 2.0 on my tablet?
h.q. 6axt3r (aged 3 and a half)
No.
It has an annoying Joey Trojan.
They can change all they want but ultimately royal blood will remain blue and danger will remain red and nothing will change that or them.
Second Republic, honestly. Joseph must have been watching too many episodes of Star Wars.
Why doesn’t he change it into an Empire while he’s at it. That’s what the Romans did when they did away with the Roman Republic and made Julius Caesar sole ruler.
I have a feeling this josephmuscat.com is going to his head.
Meanwhile, a gentle reminder.
It is now 715 days to the inauguration of the new power station.
One begins to wonder whether any part of the Labour ‘manifest’ was actually written by Labour.
After all, Kenneth Zammit Tabona wrote the Arts section, Franco Tabona the Law section, and Jeffrey, no doubt, the Science bit. More revelations to follow?
And meanwhile il-Guy just minced around.
The economic bit was written by Tonio Fenech.
Il-Guy sorted out the centrefold spread.
Cyrus provided the pictures.
I am not in favour of a presidential system, however we can have a stronger and more relevant president. Some may like the US presidential or French semi-presidential model. The Italians have discussed adopting the French model. There is nothing wrong that Malta discusses all possible alternative models of government and all possible changes to our constitution. We do no need necessarily stick to the model of one particular country, the Westminster model or that of any other country, but we can adopt what we see is best and what we deem suited to our needs.
The Dean of the Faculty of Laws seems to adhere to the concept of a second republic and that of a new constitution.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20130315/opinion/A-new-national-day.461582
Whilst the Cypriot bailout is creating the fundamentals for economic stir in our island, and foreign press is rapidly shifting their attention to our economy……
….JM is meeting the hunters
And having second thoughts about everything.
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/Former-PL-president-representing-Economy-Minister-on-the-ground-20130325
Watching CBS news at 1:42 right now. Cyprus was the main story. Guess who was also fingered.
Better get someone else to change the diapers, lttle Joey, and check out your own shorts. Big problems ahead, and you have only incompetents to cope.
You manipulated your way to the top job, little Joey. Don’t fail the faithful. And don’t be late.
All foreign investors have watches.
So our little forecast was correct then? Hell, we should set up a consulting firm. E-Cubed be damned.
Well, it is the hunters who won Muscat the election, definitely not those who understand economics and economic policy or even care about the economy at all, so I guess he owes the former that much.
It’s too early (or too late) for Carnival, as otherwise JM would be paying a visit to the floats.
All this Second Republic talk is simply Joseph Muscat’s plan to be remembered on the same level as Mintoff.
I think we need to take this into consideration with his speech of last Sunday when he said that for now we should have two national holiday but later this should be reduced to a single one.
As usual he didn’t mention which holidays these would be but I am sure the single national holiday will be Jum it-Tieni Repubblika, and Joseph Muscat will be remembered as ‘Dak li ghaqqad lil Malta’.
Lili m’ghaqqadni ma hadd. Quite the contrary, I’ve found a new distrust of everyone bar a very few.
I’ve never felt less at peace with my compatriots as I do now.
I know we’ve lived through worse times, but at the time I didn’t know how much better it might have been had we been governed by decent and competent people.
Jonathan, my thoughts exactly.
Hitler suspended certain constitutional rights soon after his rise to power including freedom of speech and other liberties.
The main effect was having a single-party state. If we consider the parallels with previous posts on the ‘movement’, the above article and the obvious tendency of MLP towards dictatorial rule, then it seems that Muscat wants to create some structure that is functionally equivalent to what Hitler declared in the Reichstag Fire Decree.
Hitler was possible because the times allowed his ideas to flourish – a weak economy, deep anti-Semitic sentiment and a general distrust of pre Nazi administrations. We could draw parallels with Malta particularly on the anti-foreigner sentiment and PN administrations.
Even if we frame the characteristics of Maltese culture through a non-anthropological lens, the interpretation of current events leads to the same conclusion. People have been duped by a masterful campaign and they are still being duped by a more masterful plan towards totalitarianism.
The Second Republic will be aimed at making Muscat President or Prime Minister for Life. And the mob will cheer him on as they did Hitler. Sadly all some such end in bloodshed.
9th March 2013 will be recorded as the saddest day in Maltese history.
So long as I can buy and read The Malta Independent, and comment as much as I want on this blog and elsewhere, then that’s good enough for me.
How, in practical terms, is Joseph preventing YOUR freedoms?
No one guarantees that you can carry on with such freedoms.
Hitler abolished freedom of speech in the Reichstag Fire Decree within four weeks of becoming Chancellor.
All that Muscat has to do is find alternatives that operate in the same way while maintaining a mask of democracy. A 9 seat majority gives him the power to introduce a huge range of laws without the need of an opposition.
There are no checks and balances and no one will stop him. Simply look at the recent appointments to top posts without the promised transparency and meritocracy.
What if you or I or someone else was better qualified to lead these organisations?
Look at the significant additions to the number of ministers and staff and the added costs creating an additional burden on Gross Domestic Product. Is it wise to add government expenditure? Isn’t it better to add government investment? Doesn’t excessive expenditure in a state of deficit increase the likelihood of going Cyprus’ way?
I find having to pay 7% to 10% on my savings for the incompetence of and gross negligence by MLP Marxist economists too hard a pill to swallow.
Turn now to another implied threats by the MLP reflecting the murmurs on the Times and other comments boards: An anti-European sentiment, if fomented properly, may spell economic, political and cultural disaster for us all.
Our personal freedom is curtailed by all these acts. Our constitutional rights to democratic governance are immediately endangered. It is not just you or me at a personal level. It is a national AND an individual problem.
I sincerely hope that you do see these clarifications as practical issues.
@Alexander Ball
There are many more freedoms than just buying and reading a paper and commenting on a blog.
Start here.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/
Sadly I totally agree with you.
I still cannot believe though that in 2013 there are so many gullible people.
More than so many of us thought, my friend. Almost thirty six thousand more than those who are not!
The brainless rest could not even think about what il-ginger and his cronies stand for – except, perhaps, that “Malta taghna lkoll” without even suspecting what that could mean.
Hi Daphne,
I know that this has nothing to do with the above post, but I have a question (which I have been asking to everyone including PN candidates who came knocking on my door) you might be able to help me with. My question is re. the labour proposal on Water & Electricity tariffs. So here it comes.
Current we pay a domestic tariff of 0.161 per unit. Once we receive the actual bill we get an eco-contribution reduction of 25% which will take the actual tariff down to 0.1207
With this in mind if Labour brings down the tariff from 0.161 to 0.12 and removes the eco-contribution reduction there will be no savings at all.
So the main question is – WILL LABOUR REMOVE THE ECO-CONTRIBUTION?
I’m afraid this was an election gimmick and mind you I’m not one who voted for change but now that we’ve got it I want a piece of the cake :)
When my nan was young (early 20th century) they used the word ‘republic’ to mean chaos and clutter, as in walking into a really messy room and saying, “Has someone declared a republic, here?”
She could never come to terms with Malta being declared a republic, it was shameful and wrong in her eyes.
Kliem ix-xih zomm fih!
Tinkering with a Constitution is not the same as reordering the entire constitutional order of a state.
At best, the notion of a Second Republic is nothing more than another laughable symptom of Joseph Muscat and Franco Debono’s obsession with their place/s in the history books.
But these characters are not to be trusted.
I expect a process in which Muscat and Debono attempt to establish new powers which they envisage will be made available to them once the new Constitution comes into force. Now this might not be particularly sinister, but it certainly is worth noting.
A serious political party would have suggested substantive revisions to the Constitution in its manifesto (eg modernising the bill of rights in line with the EU’s charter of fundamental rights; revising the electoral system by reducing the number of electoral districts).
But these are just details to Muscat. They do not fit his obsession with slogans and his ideas about his place in history.
I don’t believe that Muscat is for such radical reforms. if that was so i would be the first one to support him. What is being mentioned is that the President is voted by two-third of the house. That is not a reform fit to be called a second republic. That’s exactly a superficial constitutional reform that someone as superficial like Muscat can come up with.
i believe that it is time we move away from the English system and start at least debating French and American governmental systems, which are both inspired by the great libertarian Frederic Bastiat (google Frederic Bastait and his masterpiece The Law)
the American system does not give exclusive and excessive power to the president, on the contrary, the president is restricted by the constitution.
for example, it is unconstitutional that the president declare a war on another country, it is even unconstitutional for the President to impose any form of taxes. that is the role and responsibility of the Congressmen, that are elected by the people every four years and in middle of the President mandate.
what is happening in the US now is the total abuse of the constitution and having the president issuing executive orders to by-pass congress. We now have columnists in the New York Times that are actually calling the trashing of the American constitution, because they see it as a hurdle for their President to do whatever he likes and implement his unconstitutional programs.
The american system, the system that most of you are talking about and the system that i would love to see it introduced in Malta, was actually created to restrict the power of government and empowering the people with individual liberty.
Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else – Frederic Bastiat
Franco Debono and Joseph Muscat – a match made in hell. Two scheming, immoral, spoiled brats of the highest order. They both have other plans to what they let on, and both think they can outsmart and thwart the other.
‘Send in the Clowns’ will be prophetic, but we already knew that.