It-taħwida l-kbira dwar l-abort

Id-diskussjoni li qed tiżviluppa dwar l-abort hi taħwida waħda kbira. Taħwida li sfortunatament qed jikkontribwixxu għaliha kemm il-Knisja kif ukoll il-Partit Nazzjonalista.

L-abbozz ta’ liġi li ressaq il-Gvern hu dwar kif u meta, b’mod eċċeżżjonali, jista’ jkun hemm intervent mediku biex tintemm tqala. It-tmiem ta’ tqala hu definittivament abort: imma l-proposta hi dwar il-każijiet eċċezzjonali meta dan jista’ jsir u mhux kif qed jiġi kontinwament implikat b’mod malizzjuz.

Fir-realtà, anke dawk li qed jippontifikaw kontra l-abort qed jaċċettaw li hemm ċirkustanzi fejn dan hu permissibli. Id-dibattitu rejali għalhekk hu dwar liema huma dawn iċ-ċirkustanzi eċċezzjonali li fihom abort hu ġustifikat.

Il-Gvern qed jargumenta li apparti meta l-ħajja tal-mara tqila tkun fil-periklu jista’ jkun meħtieġ intervent meta is-saħħa tal-mara tqila tkun fil-periklu: is-saħħa hi ikkunsidrata fit-totalità tagħha jiġifieri tinkludi ukoll is-saħħa mentali. Dan hu tajjeb.

Ir-raġuni għall-inklużjoni fil-proposta tal-Gvern tad-deterjorament tas-saħħa tal-mara tqila bħala raġuni għat-tmiem ta’ tqala hi li m’għandekx toqgħod tistenna sakemm is-saħħa tkun ideterjorat tant li dan iwassal biex tpoġġi anke l-ħajja tal-mara f’periklu.

Il-kontro-argument għal dan kollu hu li dan jista’ jwassal għal abbuż.  Hu argumentat li l-parametri mfassla mill-Gvern huma wisgħin wisq u jistgħu jagħtu lok għal abbuż. Irridu nirrikonoxxu li dan hu dejjem possibli li jsir anke jekk dan ma naħsibx li hu intenzjonat.

Dan kollu għandu jwassal biex niddiskutu bi ftit iktar serjetà dwar x’miżuri għandhom jittieħdu biex ikun evitat dan il-possibli abbuż.

Wieħed mill-argumenti fid-discussion paper dwar il-proposta tal-Gvern li ġiet ippubblikata minn grupp ta’ akkademiċi hu li d-deċiżjoni dwar jekk għandux isir intervent biex tintemm tqala m’għandiex tittieħed minn persuna waħda iżda minn numru ta’ speċjalisti mediċi flimkien. Din il-proposta tista’ tkun soluzzjoni biex biha jkun hemm kontroll adegwat li bih ikun assigurat li ma jkunx hemm abbuż. Proposta li fil-fatt nisslet kummenti favorevoli mid-Deputat Prim Ministru Chris Fearne huwa u jressaq il-liġi fil-Parlament nhar it-Tnejn li għaddew.

Hemm bżonn ftit iktar serjetà fid-diskussjoni. Sfortunatament din hi nieqsa bil-kbir. Il-proposta tal-Gvern hi tajba: jeħtieġ iżda li jkun assigurat li d-dettalji tagħha jassiguraw li tista’ titħaddem b’mod li ma jsirux abbużi.

Din hi id-diskussjoni reali li għandna bżonn! Sfortunatament hi nieqsa.

Il-bejgħ tal-passaporti

Il-Gvern Malti qed jinsisti li hu biss għandu dritt li jiddeċiedi dwar iċ-ċittadinanza. Kull pajjiż għandu dan id-dritt. Dritt li hu rinfurzat bil-prinċipju tas-sussidjarjetà fit-trattati Ewropej. Prinċipju li fi kliem sempliċi jfisser li l-Unjoni Ewropeja m’għandha l-ebda jedd tindaħal u/jew tiddetta f’dawk l-oqsma li huma kompetenza tal-istati membri.

Dan hu kollu minnu. Imma ma jirriflettix l-istorja kollha.

It-trattati tal-Unjoni Ewropeja ma’ jagħtuniex biss drittijiet. Hemm ukoll dmirijiet.

Wieħed minn dawn id-dmirijiet huwa dak magħruf bħala l-prinċipju ta’ lealtà li t-trattati Ewopeja (Treaty of the EU article 4.3) jirreferu għalih bħala obbligu ta’ kooperazzjoni (principle of sincere cooperation). Ma’ jagħmilx sens li kulħadd jimxi għal rasu, b’mod partikolari f’dawk l-oqsma fejn deċiżjoni fi stat tista’ toħloq drittijiet fi stati oħra fl-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Il-ħruġ ta’ passaporti billi dawn jinxtraw kif qed jagħmel il-Gvern Malti jmur kontra dan il-prinċipju ta’ lealtà. Nafu li l-passaport Malti jagħti dritt ta’ moviment, dritt ta’ residenza u dritt ta’ xogħol f’kull rokna tal-Unjoni Ewropeja. Hemm impatt konsiderevoli fuq l-istati l-oħra membri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja. Għalhekk hemm l-obbligu tal-lealtà u l-kooperazzjoni.

Għalhekk il-Gvern Malti miexi ħażin. M’għandux jedd li jbiegħ il-passaporti, jgħid x’jgħid.

Dan mhux qed ngħidu illum. Ilni ngħidu 7 snin.

Tista’ jekk trid tara dan l-artiklu fuq dan il-blog:

Subsidiarity and loyalty : 25 ta’ Jannar 2014

Ambaxxati b’daqs ta’ raħal

L-ambaxxata Amerikana nbniet 9 snin ilu fuq medda kbira ta’ art f’ Ta’ Qali li nxtrat mingħand il-Gvern Malti għas-somma ta’  €14.6 miljuni. L-ambaxxata f’Ta’ Qali hi mibnija fuq art b’qies ta’ madwar 4 ettari, jiġifieri 40,000 metru kwadru.

Iktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa l-Awtorità tal-Ippjanar approvat permess ta’ żvilupp biex tinbena ambaxxata Ċiniża f’Pembroke fuq art b’qies ta’ madwar 2 ettari, jiġifieri 20,000 metru kwadru.  

Għalkemm il-kumpless tal-ambaxxata Ċiniża ser ikun madwar nofs fid-daqs meta mqabbel ma dak Amerikan f’Ta’ Qali xorta hu kbir wisq. L-art li fuqha ser jinbena dan il-kumpless inxtrat mingħand il-Gvern Malti għas-somma ta’ €7,880,000.

Għalfejn dawn il-pajjiżi barranin qed jitħallew jibnu l-ambaxxati tagħhom fuq art daqshekk kbira?  Jekk verament jeħtieġu dan l-ispazju għaliex ma ġewx imħajra biex jirrestawraw xi bini qadim, preferibilment storiku, b’benefiċċju għall-komunità Maltija?

Kemm ser indumu ma jkollna xi talba oħra għall-iżvilupp ta’ kumpless ieħor għal ambaxxata enormi? Forsi mill-Federazzjoni Russa?

Id-dibattitu pubbliku dwar l-Università Amerikana f’Malta suppost li għamel lil ħafna nies iktar konxji. Imma jidher li ma tgħallmu xejn mid-dibattitu pubbliku li wassal biex l-unika parti ta’ din l-Univeristà li illum qed tiffunżjona qegħda flok it-tarżna f’Bormla. Il-bini storiku li kien jifforma parti mit-tarżna ta’ Bormla, l-imħażen tal-Kavallieri tas-sbatax-il seklu u l-workshops tal-Ammiraljat Ingliż tad-dsatax-il seklu ġew restawrati u ħadu ħajja ġdida. Dan kollu issarraf f’ġid ambjentali għall-pajjiż kollu u l-ħarsien ta’ art f’Marsaskala minn żvilupp li kien jeqridha.

Jekk nistaqsu għaliex dawn l-ambaxxati kbar, daqs raħal, qatt m’hu ser ikollna tweġiba onesta. Għax hu ovvju li apparti x-xogħol konsulari normali u l-iżvilupp ta’ relazzjonijiet tajba mad-dinja tan-negozju u mal-komunitajiet lokali, fir-realtà, dawn l-ambaxxati huma “widna” iffukata biex tisma’ dak li qed jiġri fir-reġjun tal-Mediterran.

Uħud iħobbu jiddeskrivu kemm lill-iStati Uniti kif ukoll lir-Repubblika Ċiniża bħala ħbieb kbar ta’ Malta. Ir-realtà hi ftit differenti. Hu prinċipju bażiku tal-politika barranija li l-pajjiżi m’għandhomx ħbieb, għandhom biss interessi! Ir-relazzjonijiet diplomatiċi, imbagħad, iservu biex iġibu l-quddiem dawn l-interessi!

Il-posizzjoni ta’ Malta fil-Mediterran tagħmilha idejali bħala ċentru fejn tisma’ u tosserva. Dan, hu interess ewlieni li minħabba fih kemm l-Istati Uniti kif ukoll ir-Repubblika Ċiniża għandhom bżonn spazju kbir.

Id-dibattitu riċenti dwar il-possibiltà ta’ ftehim li jirregola l-militar Amerikan f’pajjiżna (Status of Forces Agreement : SOFA) hu indikattiv. Il-kummenti li smajna u qrajna jagħtu idea żgħir ta’ dak li kien għaddej madwar il-mejda.  

F’pajjiżi kbar, ambaxxati kbar jistgħu jagħmlu sens. Imma Malta, tista’ tgħaddi mingħajrhom. M’għandniex bżonn ambaxxati kbar biex intejbu r-relazzjonijiet mal-Istati Uniti jew iċ-Ċina.

L-ambaxxata tal-Istati Uniti f’Ta’ Qali issa ilha mibnija u ilha topera 9 snin. Imma l-ambaxxata Ċiniża għadha fuq il-pjanta. MInkejja li għadha kif ġiet approvata l-ambaxxatur Ċiniż għad għandu ħin biex jaħseb ftit dwar kif jista’ jindirizza n-nuqqas ta’ spazju li għandu mod ieħor. Jista’ jikunsidra r-riabilitazzjoni ta’ bini qadima, possibilment bini storiku minflok ma jibni ambaxxata daqs raħal.  

Jekk jagħmel hekk ikun qed jittrasforma problema f’opportunità.

Qatt mhu tard, sur Ambaxxatur.

Ippubblikat fuq Illum : Il-Ħadd 1 ta’ Novembru 2020

Village size embassies: are they required?

The US embassy was built some 9 years ago on a large tract of land at Ta’ Qali purchased from the Maltese Government for €14.6 million. The footprint of the Ta’ Qali Embassy is slightly over 4 hectares in size.

Earlier this week a development permit for a new Chinese Embassy at Pembroke, covering an area of around 2 hectares, was approved by the Planning Authority. The Chinese Embassy compound will be half the size of the US embassy complex but it still has quite a substantial footprint. The land to be developed as a Chinese Embassy was purchased from the Maltese Government for €7,880,000.

Why have these foreign governments been permitted to develop their embassies on such large tracts of land? If they really need space, would it not have been much more helpful if they were advised to restore some old, possibly historic building, as a result giving back something to Maltese society?

How long will it take before some other request for the development of another enormous embassy complex is made? From the Russian Federation maybe?

Does the debate on the American University in Malta not ring a bell? Have we not learnt anything from that public debate as a result of which the only functioning campus is at the former Malta Drydocks? The historic properties on that site, namely the seventeenth century Knights’ Building and the nineteenth century British naval workshops have been restored and given a new use. This has resulted in a net environmental gain, in the process protecting land at Marsaskala from development: a portion of our countryside was saved from ruin.

We will never have an honest reply to the basic question as to what all this space in the village size embassies is needed for. In addition to basic consular work and the development of relations with the business and local community these village size embassies are also inevitably an eavesdropping focus for intelligence gathering in the Mediterranean region.

Some tend to describe both the United States and the Republic of China as being very good friends of Malta. In reality it is a well-established foreign policy principle that countries do not have friends: they have interests. Diplomatic relations serve to further these interests.

Malta’s central location in the Mediterranean makes it ideal as a monitoring post and that is undoubtedly one of the basic interests for such large embassies. Ensuring that this interest is well catered for in Malta is a priority for both the United States of America and the Republic of China.

The recent debate on the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) relative to US Forces is indicative. Only the naïve would have failed to note the unofficial comments flying around in order to understand what was going on around the negotiating tables.

In larger countries it may make sense to have large embassies. However, in Malta we could definitely do without them. In a small country such as ours, they are definitely not required to improve the relations with the United States, China or any other country.

The Embassy of the United States of America has now been built and it has been operational for the past nine years. The Chinese embassy is however still on plan. Even if it has just been approved the Chinese Ambassador could still give the matter some further thought and consider the possible rehabilitation of some old building or buildings, possibly historical ones, instead of his massive embassy, the size of a small village!

Possibly that could turn the problem of the location and land uptake of the proposed embassy on its head and develop it into a unique opportunity.

It is never too late Mr Ambassador to take note.

published on The Malta Independent on Sunday: 1 November 2020

Tradituri u tradimenti

 

Żewġ kelmiet li l-użu tagħhom qiegħed jiżdied. Dan id-diskors ma jagħmel ġid lil ħadd. La lil min jgħidu u l-anqas li min jisimgħu.

Dan hu diskors li ġeneralment qed jingħad minn persuni viċin il-Gvern tal-lum u dan b’difiża għall-kritika li qed issir, f’Malta u barra għal dak li għaddej madwarna.

Nifhem li l-kritika ddarras, b’mod partikolari meta tkun iebsa. Pero’ min hu konvint minn dak li qed jagħmel m’għandux ħtieġa ta’ insulti, iżda hu kapaċi jwieġeb argument b’argument.

L-użu tal-kelma “tradituri” fil-konfront tal-kritiċi tal-Gvern l-iktar li tagħmel il-ħsara hu lill-Gvern innifsu għax twassal il-messaġġ li dawk li jappoġġaw lill-Gvern (jew parti minnhom) huma intolleranti għall-kritika.

Fuq kollox għalkemm huwa l-Gvern (bis-saħħa tal-maġġoranza li għandu fil-Parlament) li jiddeċiedi, ma jfissirx li neċessarjament illi għandu raġun, kemm f’dak li jgħid kif ukoll f’dak li jagħmel.

Tajjeb li dejjem inżommu quddiem għajnejna li n-numri jiddeterminaw min jiddeċiedi, mhux min għandu raġun.

Il-kritika lill-Gvern tal-lum saret u tibqa’ issir, bħalma saret lill-Gvern tal-bieraħ. Iċ-ċavetta biex nimxu l-quddiem hi li lkoll niftħu widnejna beraħ biex nisimgħu iktar.

B’dan il-mod biss hemm iċ-ċans li jsiru inqas żbalji, mhux bl-insulti. Għax l-insulti huma l-għodda esklussiva ta’ min m’għandux fiduċja fir-raġuni.

Brexit : issa nistennew is-siegħa tal-prova

Huwa tajjeb li l-bieraħ il-Gvern Malti u l-Opposizzjoni fil-Parlament qablu illi fil-każ Brexit Malta għandha tfittex dak li hu fl-interess nazzjonali.

Ħadd ma għandu interess li jfittex l-interess nazzjonali Malti ħlief il-politiċi Maltin. La r-Renju Unit, la l-Ġermanja, la Franza u l-anqas l-Italja u insomma ħadd iktar ħliefna.

Diġa rajna tul is-snin kif il-parti l–kbira tal-pajjiżi l-oħra fl-Unjoni Ewropeja bdew jagħtu ftit każ ta’ Malta meta bdew ġejjin f’sitwazzjoni simili, bħal per eżempju fil-każ tal-immigranti Sirjani. Konna ilna s-snin nitkellmu dwar il-ħtieġa li kulħadd jerfa’ sehmu. Imma anke issa li intlaqtu pajjiżi oħra ukoll għadhom mexjin bil-mod wisq.

Wara l-paroli vojt fil-prietki ta’ tmiem il-ġimgħa fil-każini politiċi, l-bieraħ kien mument ta’ ħafna kliem sabiħ. Naraw kif jiżviluppaw l-affarijiet fil-ġimgħat li ġejjin, fis-siegħa tal-prova!

Wara Barroso min?

Għamel tajjeb il-Gvern Malti li ħabbar illi f’dan l-istadju ser jappoġġa l-kandidatura  tal-ex Prim Ministru tal-Lussemburgu Jean Claude Junker biex dan ikun is-suċċessur ta’ Josè Manuel Barroso. Il-posizzjoni tal-Gvern Malti tirrispetta dak li jipprovdi t-trattat ta’ Liżbona u li ser ikun implimentat għall-ewwel darba issa: fl-għażla tal-President tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja, il-Kunsill Ewropew [kompost mill-Kapijiet tal-Gvernijiet] għandu jirrispetta r-riżultat elettorali tal-Parlament Ewropew.

Il-posizzjoni li ħa l-Gvern Malti hi posizzjoni tajba mhux biss għax tirrispetta t-trattat ta’ Liżbona, iżda fuq kollox għax dan qed isir fil-konfront ta’ rappreżentant ta’ partit politiku differenti minn dak li jappartjeni għalih  il-partit fil-Gvern f’Malta. Huwa tajjeb li l-ispirtu Ewropew qed isaħħah  l-għeruq f’pajjiżna ukoll!  Jidher, mid-dikjarazzjonijiet ta’ Joseph Muscat, illi Jean Claude Junker ta’ assigurazzjonijiet lill-Gvern Malti illi l-programm tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja mmexxija minnu ser tagħti attenzjoni u enerġija lil proposti dwar l-immigrazzjoni skond ix-xewqa tal-Gvernijiet diversi fil-Mediterran, fuq quddiem net Malta u l-Italja. Dan hu pass tajjeb. Prosit.

Il-Kunsill Ewropew mistenni li jieħu deċiżjoni dwar is-suċċessur ta’ Barroso fis-summit ta’ tmiem ix-xahar. S’issa għadu mhux ċar jekk il-proposta tal-ħatra ta’ Junker hux ser tkun approvata u dan minħabba li hemm numru ta’ Gvernijiet Ewropej li iddikjaraw jew indikaw li ma jaqblux ma dan.

L-iktar li semma’ leħnu kien David Cameron Prim Ministru ta’ dak li sa issa hu r-Renju Unit. Cameron qed jopponi l-ħatra ta’ Junker minħabba l-politika federalist tiegħu (ta’ Junker) li Cameron iqies bħala ostaklu kbir għall-posizzjoni ta’ Cameron li l-Unjoni Ewropeja iżżarma kemm tista’ mir-regolamenti tagħha li ma jikkonċernawx il-kummerċ!

Cameron mhux waħdu. Għandu l-appoġġ tal-Gvernijiet tal-Isvezja, l-Olanda u l-Ungerija.

L-anqas Matteo Renzi, għall-Gvern Taljan, ma jidher li hu kuntent bin-nomina ta’ Junker.

Jekk dawn hux ser jibqgħu waħedhom jew jekk hux ser jiżdiedu fl-opposizzjoni għall-ħatra ta’ Junker għadu ftit kmieni biex inkunu nafu. Imma huwa importanti għax il-ħatra ta’ Junker teħtieġ l-approvazzjoni ta’ maġġoranza kwalifikata: 55% tal-pajjizi membri li jirrappreżentaw 65% tal-popolazzjoni Ewropeja.

Jekk il-Kunsill Ewropew japprova l-ħatra ta’ Jean Claude Junker bħala President tal-Kummissjoni Ewropeja, imbagħad ikun imiss l-approvazzjoni tal-Parlament Ewropew. Fil-Parlament Ewropew l-opinjonijiet huma ħafna iktar ikkuluriti. Għalissa xejn ma hu assigurata, l-anqas hemm.  Wara l-aħħar ta’ dan ix-xahar, kif ukoll meta l-programm politiku ta’ Junker ikun magħruf imbagħad l-affarijiet ikunu ftit iktar ċari.

Nistennew u naraw.

ippubblikat fuq iNews: it-Tlieta 17 ta’ Ġunju 2014

Tgħid nitgħallmu mill-iżbalji?

Huwa ta’ sodisfazzjon li l-Gvern u l-Kummissjoni Ewropeja waslu għal ftehim dwar l-iskema ta’ ċittadinanza.

Il-bieraħ fil-għaxija tħabbar li wara diskussjonijiet kien hemm qbil li l-iskema ta’ ċittadinanza ser tkun emendata biex tinkludi l-obbligu ta’ residenza ta’ sena. Dan hu tibdil radikali għall-iskema u jagħmel l-iskema kompletament differenti.

Ser ikun hemm min jargumenta dwar jekk sena huwiex perjodu qasir. Bħal dejjem hemm argumenti validi li jiġġustifikaw attitudni bħal din. Ser jibqa’ min hu kontra l-iskema fil-prinċipju. L-istess bħalma hemm min hu tal-fehma li tul is-snin l-għoti taċ-ċittadinanza b’mod ġenerali illaxkat ħafna.

L-iżball fundamentali tal-Gvern fil-proċess kollu kien li għaġgel u dam biex fehem il-ħtieġa tal-konsultazzjoni. Il-ħin li jintuża fil-konsultazzjoni mhuwiex ħin moħli. Huwa ħin li fih tista’ tifhem aħjar kif jaħsibha ħaddieħor. Bil-konsultazzjoni, proposta tajba issir aħjar filwaqt li proposta ħażina jkollok ċans tibdilha.

Sfortunatament l-iżbalji li saru mill-Gvern u r-reazzjonijiet kultant sproporzjonati tal-Opposizzjoni, t-tnejn li huma, ser jissarfu inevitabilment fi ħsara lir-reputazzjoni ta’ Malta. Hemm bżonn li nitgħallmu minn dawn l-iżbalji.

Nistennew ħalli naraw id-dettalji tal-iskema kif emendata.

Fil-Parlament Ewropew : Joseph u l-bejgħ taċ-Ċittadinanza

Ħadd ma għandu jkun sorpriż li l-iskema tal-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza kif proposta minn Joseph ser tkun diskussa mill-Parlament Ewropew.

Prattikament il-partiti kollha fil-Parlament Ewropew iridu l-spjegazzjonijiet. Dan jgħodd ukoll għas-soċjalisti fil-Parlament Ewropew.

Hu ċar għal kulħadd li huma l-Gvernijiet nazzjonali li għandhom il-poter li jiddeċiedu materji dwar iċ-ċittadinanza. Imma huwa daqstant ieħor ċar li f’dak kollu li għandu impatt fuq il-pajjiżi l-oħra membri tal-Unjoni kull Gvern għandu l-obbligu li joqgħod lura.

Il-bejgħ taċ-ċittadinanza Maltija qed tiġi reklamata minn Henley and Partners, konsulenti u aġenti tal-Gvern Malti, bħala x-xiri ta’ aċċess liberu fiż-żona Schengen. Huwa dan li qed inissel tħassib fid-diversi pajjiżi membri tal-Unjoni Ewropeja.

Membri Parlamentari Ewropej, kif ukoll diversi Gvernijiet Ewropej, qed jistaqsu dwar xi dritt għandu l-Gvern ta’ Malta li jagħti dan id-dritt ta’ aċċess lil min jixtri ċ-ċittadinanza.

M’hemmx tweġiba faċli. Imma żgur li ser jinqalgħu diffikultajiet mhux żgħar għax ħadd ma jrid li min jista’ jidħol f’pajjiżu jiddeċidieh pajjiż ieħor. Din hi l-problema li ħoloq Joseph Muscat. Qed jassumi li hu u l-Gvern Malti għandhom xi dritt li jiddeċiedu li jagħtu permess lil numru ta’ ċittadini ta’ pajjiżi barra mill-Unjoni Ewropeja biex ikunu jistgħu jidħlu meta u kif iridu fl-Unjoni Ewropeja. U dan bi ħlas ta’ €625,000.

Din ħadd m’hu ser jaċcetta li issir.

Dan hu l-qofol tad-diskussjoni ta’ Jannar li ġej fil-Parlament Ewropew.

The citizenship bubble of Malta

Many issues are involved in the citizenship debate.

The government clearly considers Maltese citizenship as just another commodity, which it can milk. Initially it even removed the transparency rule from the statute book, which rule ensured the publication of the names of all those who acquired Maltese citizenship.

Whereas local public opinion was completely ignored, the Labour government reacted to the international media coverage by announcing that it will reverse its ditching of transparency. Yet its reaction may be too late as the damage done to Malta’s reputation is not easily reversed.

The international media queried the unconventional methods used to generate the finance required by the Maltese state.

Within EU circles it is clear that issues concerning citizenship are a competence reserved to member states. Yet the  Schengen dimension of EU citizenship cannot be ignored.

The citizenship scheme is attractive because, through it, the prospective citizen attains freedom of movement within the EU.

It is a very serious concern which can only be adequately addressed if the due diligence process is foolproof.

The problem is that, to date, the Maltese Government has already signalled that it is not that much concerned by the impact of persons who are associated with a fraudulent past, a case in point being government advisor Shiv Nair who is listed permanently on the World’s Bank blacklist.

Another recent example is China Communications Construction Company Limited, also on the World Bank blacklist. This Chinese Company will carry out (gratis) the feasibility study for a Malta-Gozo bridge on the basis of the very friendly relations between the two republics, we were told. (I had the impression that countries had no friends, they just have interests!)

This follows the earlier selection of Lahmeyer International as an advisor to the Gonzi Government. Lahmeyer International too was on the World Bank’s  blacklist.

Past performance indicates that due diligence is not an area in which the Republic of Malta has excelled.

Is it a sale or is it an investment? In fact it is a bit of both. It is surely an unconventional way of raising finance. Its major characteristic is that it focuses on the short term benefits and ignores the long term impacts.  The selling price can give immediate results: it can finance the start-up of specific projects. Whether these will be successful is another matter altogether. The impacts of an investment scheme will take more time, its a long term exercise.

The method of payment selected for the purchase of citizenship is clearly based on the St Kitts and Nevis model in the Caribbean.  In St Kitts and Nevis, payment for citizenship is received by the Sugar Industry Diversification Foundation and, subsequently, invested. The investment made is not at the discretion of the applicant for citizenship but a decision by the country dishing out the citizenship.

Public opinion considers that citizenship should be acquired through establishing solid roots in the country. Establishing minimum residence criteria and committment to the economic development of Malta through investment and job creation are essential criteria to be linked to the award of economic citizenship.

Government has done well, even though late in the day, to declare that it will reverse its secrecy stance. The declaration by Deputy Prime Minister Louis Grech that the regulations being drafted to implement government’s proposal will ensure that the names of those granted citizenship under the new legislation are public is welcome. This new position adopted by the government links with and reinforces the public committments made on the need for more robust due diligence.

It is, however, clear  that regulations alone will not suffice to entrench transparency in the citizenship scheme.  Amendments will also be necessary to the main legislation, in particular to remove reporting restrictions imposed by Parliament on the regulator.

The citizenship debate was also characteristed by the radical position taken by the Nationalist Party that, once back in office, it would not only take steps to scrap the new citizenship scheme but that it would, moreover, withdraw citizenship granted under the provisions of the scheme.

The Attorney General has advised the government that the PN’s proposal would be unconstitutional and would infringe human rights. Such advice was confirmed by the Dean of the Faculty of Law and by constitutional expert Ian Refalo.

The PN has declared that it is in receipt of legal advice reinforcing its position on the withdrawal of citizenship granted.

Whilst the Prime Minister has published the advice received from the Attorney General, the Leader of the Opposition has failed to follow suit. The Leader of the Opposition needs to be consistent. He cannot chastise the government for being secretive whilst simultaneously withholding important information from the public. It is not just the government which needs to be transparent.

The availability of both government and opposition to meet and discuss possible modifications to the citizenship scheme is welcome. Hopefully the wider national interest will prevail.

published in The Times Saturday, 23 November 2013