Beef olives

Beef Olives, or better bragjoli, is a traditional Maltese dish. Some may consider it as savoury. On my part, I do not dream of eating it, not because of its taste but because of my vegetarian creed. What makes it so singular is that it is a convoluted way of dealing with meat, inventing stuffing, and then binding the rolled meat around. Of old, the final touch was a piece of thread around the rolled ball. Now a toothpick serves the purposes. Once cooked and presented on the plate, the slightest touch of the knife is enough to bring all the structure apart.

Although the craze for changing national emblems has passed, I was going to suggest that it should be made the national emblem. It represents how we do things, and how these fall apart at the first touch.

Last week brought me face to face with so many bragjoli. There is some variety, but it does not matter as the stuffing of bragjoli is also an optional choice of the cook.

I needed to have a copy of a marriage certificate duly authenticated with an apostille. This is a big seal placed at the back of the certificate to show that the signatures on it are not false. From the Public Registry I went down St Lucia Street, as usual hoping to go through Merchants Street and up to the Foreign Office for the apostille.

I noticed that there were barriers with signs printed on them. An arrow indicated the way for pedestrians. I believed that the sign was true, although it did not have an apostille on it. When I walked all the distance to the gate and read again the two signs affixed, it was too late for me to realise that there was no pedestrian exit and no pathway. There was only one option. Go back and kick yourself in the heel for believing what you are told in Malta.

Garnishee orders

In the frenzy of changing laws, one area that has become a nightmare is with reference to garnisheed orders. When a person seeks a garnishee order for a credit he has, he does not have prior information in which bank funds may be found. Previously, a bank was later called on to say whether there are funds. Now the banks have to deposit the amount up to the limit mentioned in the garnishee order.

It so happened that Mrs A had a claim and she obtained a garnishee order against Mrs B. The garnishee was sent to two banks, on the assumption that both these banks had branches in the village where Mrs B lives. She had funds in both. Both banks immediately sent the money to the court registry, certainly at an expense. If the money was earning interest, all interest was stopped as the court does not give any interest on deposits. Mrs B was furious, and she was right. Why should she pay twice?

Mrs A wanted only her pound of meat (for bragjoli) and nothing more. So she had to ask for a counter warrant, which is an order of the Court for the release of the money held in excess. That was a court order. Yet for the registry of the Court, that was not enough. They needed not a court order but a consent to release the funds!

The registry which received the counter warrant, and which presented it anyway to the judge for his approval, did not recognise the validity of an order to return the money to its rightful owner. I happened to be acting for Mrs A, but all my pity goes to Mrs B to the extent that she was taxed twice, when once was enough.

Can you imagine this bragjola? It is the work of a stroke of the pen with an amendment to a procedure that was intended to make things simpler? Do not believe what you are told.

Just a little pregnant...

Going back to marriage certificates, these seem to have become slightly irrelevant. Conception does not depend on such certificates. An engaged couple was actively seeking a nest, and how to finance it. All of a sudden they discovered that she was a little bit pregnant. The girl needed counselling, so she resorted to the service provided.

The young man came for advice accompanied by his parents. He was too downcast to express himself. But the future grandmother was in control and had a list of questions. What about the surname after the birth of the child? What about maintenance? What are the rights? As the talking was about the planning on a long term basis for the couple, which showed no sign of breaking up and the mother was supportive of her son and his fiancée, I asked why should they envisage such problems about recognising the child and the maintenance.

Then the mother told me the story. The girl, who was not present, told her that during counselling she was advised to register the child as a single mother, with father unknown, as otherwise she may find complications in later life. The engagement may break down and she would be landed with a problem. What if he goes abroad and she needs his consent for something relating to the welfare of the child? After counselling, the girl suggested an agreement about maintenance but no recognition of the child. Is this counselling in the right direction?

Another bragjola of how things are done. We should have responsible parenthood. A girl should be assisted to give a true paternity to a child, with the father shouldering his responsibilities. There are too many unknown fathers, shielded by a system which, in bragjoli fashion, creates more single mothers.