Malta does not need divorce, a report conducted by the church insists.

The report, “For Worse Not for Better”, is a reaction to the Martin Scicluna report which advocated the introduction of divorce.

It was compiled by Progett Impenn, which is made up of representatives from the Diocesan Family Commission, Caritas and the Cana Movement.

Mgr Anton Gouder said the Scicluna report could be faulted on a number of matters including lack of proper sources, wrong data and unsubstantiated statements.

The church report disputed the argument made that divorce should be introduced because there were a number of negative social situations in society. It argued that none of these social ills could be healed or diminished by divorce.

Moreover, from a social perspective, divorce would only make the situation worse.

The church contested the fact that the introduction of divorce would reduce the number of cohabiting couples backing its arguments by foreign research. It said that what sounded logical was contradicted by facts.

Mgr Gouder said that “those who were not part of the solution to the problem were part of the problem”.

Asked to comment on whether people were annulling to still have the right to remarry in spite of the non-existence of divorce, Mgr Gouder said that when a couple were going through an annulment process, it was not a case of one person against another but of a couple against the institution of marriage.

The principle adopted in the Church Tribunal of having a defender of the bond should also be adopted in the civil court when deciding on annulment cases.

Asked whether it was discriminatory that Malta recognised divorce obtained from foreign courts, Mgr Gouder said that discrimination was when people in the same situation were treated differently.

“The law stipulates that a Maltese court can recognise a divorce obtained abroad if either of the couple were domiciled in that country. This is not discrimination because the situation is different,” he said.