A response to Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca

In her recent article in the Times of Malta (July 28), former president Marie-Louise Coleiro Preca argued that we have a duty to history to be honest, fair and dignified in our assessments. Her piece, however, offers a revisionist account of Malta’s history from 1981 to 1987. This response aims to provide a more comprehensive and critical perspective on that era, addressing several key points that were overlooked.

My critique of this period is not a personal attack on the late Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici or anyone associated with his government, including Coleiro Preca. While those who knew him describe him as a principled man, principles can sometimes lead to decisions that have severe consequences for others.

For many Maltese citizens who lived through those years, the memory of the political climate remains a painful part of our shared history – a memory that no apology or excuse can erase. It is in this context that I wish to challenge the narrative presented by the former president.

I would ask the former president to address the following historical points regarding the Mifsud Bonnici administration:

The 1981 election and the transfer of power:  Mifsud Bonnici became prime minister three years after the 1981 general election, in which the Labour Party lost the popular vote but retained power through a gerrymandered electoral system. This occurred despite Labour leader Dom Mintoff having promised not to govern without the support of the majority of the Maltese people.

Mifsud Bonnici’s acceptance of the premiership under these circumstances, and the subsequent delay of the next election until the latest possible date allowed by the constitution, marked a period of governance that lacked a popular mandate from the outset.

Police brutality and political violence: The years of the Mifsud Bonnici premiership were marked by significant political turmoil and police misconduct. The police commissioner at the time was later convicted of being an accomplice in the grievous bodily harm and subsequent death of a person in police custody in 1980. He served a lengthy prison sentence.

The police force included a Special Mobile Unit (SMU), a section reportedly trained by North Korean instructors, which used unmarked uniforms and was tasked with suppressing opposition protests. This unit was implicated in several serious incidents, including the use of live ammunition against civilians in Rabat and Żejtun. Following a shooting incident in Rabat, the SMU proceeded to burn down the local Nationalist Party (PN) club.

Furthermore, a PN activist was shot and killed inside a PN club during this period. The police subsequently attempted to frame a PN supporter for the murder. This pattern of assigning blame to political opponents for heinous crimes is a recurring theme that continues to resonate today, such as with the insensitive taunts directed at the family of a murdered journalist.

A PN activist was shot and killed inside a PN club during this period- Tonio Brincat

Labor relations and economic mismanagement: The former president describes this era as a time of progress, yet, many would argue that it was marked by economic and labour instability. The General Workers’ Union (GWU), which was closely aligned with the government, often suppressed dissent among its members. For instance, a protest by workers at the Maldiam company over downgraded working conditions was violently broken up by pro-Labour thugs, who were summoned to the factory and beat protesting workers with chains. This incident, which my friend who worked there and Peppi Azzopardi can attest to, stands in stark contrast to the ideal of workers’ rights.

Despite high unemployment, the Mifsud Bonnici government managed to come close to winning the 1987 election. This near-win can be attributed to the employment of tens of thousands of individuals in the public sector – many of whom were given jobs with no real duties. The long-term financial repercussions of this overemployment continue to be felt by Maltese taxpayers to date.

In an additional effort to win the election, the government confiscated large parcels of Church land, divided them into plots and allocated these plots to multiple individuals – sometimes to people who already owned a home. This chaotic land allocation created a mess that the subsequent government had to resolve.

Infrastructure and public services: The public services during this period were notoriously unreliable. Malta suffered from chronic shortages of electricity and water, with entire towns and villages frequently experiencing multi-day cuts to both services simultaneously. This widespread failure of basic infrastructure is a difficult reality to reconcile with a narrative of national progress.

A call for a public apology: Rather than engage in a revisionist debate, I would ask Coleiro Preca to reflect on her own role during these years. Where was she when her party clung to power without a popular majority? Did she ever publicly dissociate herself from the government’s controversial actions? Has she ever formally apologised for being a part of a party that, when in power, inflicted so much pain and terror on the Maltese people?

For many who lived through those dark days, Coleiro Preca’s attempts to whitewash the history of that period are deeply offensive.

If she wishes to earn the respect of those who were scarred by those events, she must first offer a sincere and public apology for her association with a government that, under the leadership of the late Mifsud Bonnici, presided over one of the darkest chapters in modern Maltese history.

Tonio Brincat is a businessman with no connection to any political party.