Alexei Navalny died from an overdose of courage. He died alone in a prison in the Arctic Circle. He died alone because, in today’s world, those who stand up for justice find themselves isolated.
There are similarities between Navalny’s death and the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Daphne was killed because, like Navalny, she spoke out against the rampant corruption at the very heart of government. Both executions were explicitly timed to happen when government support was at a high. Daphne was murdered just after Labour’s 2017 landslide election victory. Vladimir Putin timed Navalny’s death with positive developments from the Ukrainian front.
Both governments continued to show disdain for the victims after their deaths. Daphne’s impromptu memorial was repeatedly cleansed under the cover of darkness by government personnel. The same happens in Russia, where men wearing balaclavas clear the flowers placed to commemorate Navalny.
There is one significant difference between the situation in Russia and Malta. Protests from civil society following Daphne’s murder led to the resignation of former prime minister Joseph Muscat. Why isn’t the same happening in Russia? People who disagree with their government’s actions but fail to protest against their government do so for three main reasons: they are afraid, complacent, or they believe they are powerless to change what is wrong in their country.
In an award-winning documentary shot in 2022, Navalny was asked: “If you are killed, if this does happen, what message do you leave behind for the Russian people?” His reply to the people of Russia was: “Don’t give up.” He says those who believe in the rule of law are stronger than they think. They must, however, overcome their fear, for it is the good people’s inaction that allows the bad people to triumph.
Daphne Caruana Galizia was killed because, like Alexei Navalny, she spoke out against the rampant corruption at the very heart of government
Navalny’s words should be an eye-opener for us. ‘Bad people’ are still triumphing in Malta. They are triumphing because some of our institutions, most notably the police force and the office of the public prosecutor, fail to carry out their duties without fear or favour.
Instead of the rule of law, we are governed by the rule of money. And money, as Ryszard Kapuscinski wrote, has the power to change all the iron laws into rubber bands.
In a recent interview, Muscat said that everyone in Malta has become a “sinjur żgħir”. According to Muscat, everyone in Malta is rich enough to live comfortably.
The logic here seems to be that, since we have all become rich men, we should not be bothered about small things like the exploitation of workers’ rights, the country’s inadequate infrastructure, the rampant corruption and the murder of a journalist. We should look at our newly earned ‘riches’ and not question how those riches came about. The princely end justifies the pauper means.
Caruana Galizia refused to do that, just like Navalny refused to look the other way in Russia. And we should follow their example, especially in the wake of what is happening in Malta.
The government and the Labour Party, under Robert Abela, is currently carrying out a laundering exercise. Abela is putting the force of government and the Labour Party behind ‘bad people’.
He said they have paid enough for their crimes and should now be re-integrated within the party and the government.
In the process, Abela is sending a clear message to the judiciary and to other State institutions meant to administer justice against these individuals. If you go against them, then you are going against the government.
This is a travesty of the rule of law. Public office is not a right. It is a duty. Anybody who fails in that duty should not be given a second chance, especially when they have not faced justice or accounted properly for their actions.
What Abela should be doing is ensuring that all our institutions function, as they were meant to, at arm’s length from political power. He should be setting an example and cutting all ties with those who abused power and stuffed their snouts in the trough. Instead, he is planting the seed of doubt against the judiciary, aligning himself with those being investigated rather than those carrying out the investigation.
His actions spell trouble for Malta. If he is successful, Prime Minister Abela will effectively reverse the achievements of the civil protests that led to the downfall of Muscat’s Labour government. He will be mocking all those who protested against Caruana Galizia’s assassination.
In the months ahead, our institutions are going to be tested. Some are praying for the systems to fail.
The question, similar to what we are asking about the Russians, is, what are we prepared to do about it? Will we be governed by our fear, complacency or feeling of resignation, or will we stand up to be counted?
Mario de MarcoMario de Marco is the Nationalist Party’s spokesperson on tourism.