In what was probably one of the most important general council meetings in the Nationalist Party’s long history, a decision was made, by a margin of 56 per cent to 44 per cent, to hold a fresh leadership election.
That kicked off a lengthy five-stage process, under the party’s statute, which will lead to retaining Adrian Delia as leader or to replacing him.
The first step – a call for candidates’ expressions of interest – has just been completed and the field will be a narrow one. The other potential contenders dropped out to make way for outsider Bernard Grech to face Delia.
The next step is for the party’s electoral commission to refer the two names to the candidates’ commission for the “necessary verification”, conducted in the form of a “due diligence exercise into the employment, profession or business of the prospective candidates”.
The leadership process will culminate with the nomination of the two men, if they are deemed eligible to stand under the due process, and the formal start of candidates’ campaigning.
There are undoubted benefits to the due diligence exercise laid down by the new PN statute, as it commendably sets a benchmark for those aspiring to lead the party.
They must show they are “persons of integrity and honesty, and solely motivated by the desire to serve the people and the common good” (presumably defined as the nation’s common good, not simply the PN’s). Moreover, candidates must be deemed “competent” (in which way is not defined) in order to pass the due diligence test.
Regulations defining the manner the due diligence process is to be conducted, the criteria defining the qualities and qualifications of those contesting and the time frame of the process itself have been left to the discretion of the executive committee.
The candidates commission may recruit ‘experts’ to help it carry out its evaluation and will send its report on each candidate to both the electoral commission and the administrative council. Candidates might be “obliged to attend training”, though this is not defined.
The process raises intriguing questions. The most pointed is whether current leader Delia will be deemed eligible to stand for re-election given the question marks that have been raised about his murky financial dealings and his apparent association with Yorgen Fenech, the owner of 17 Black and alleged mastermind behind Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination.
Only time will tell, once the election of the new PN leader has been completed under this process – which is possibly unique among liberal democratic parties anywhere – whether it will be an electoral procedure worth emulating by others or worth retaining by the PN.
The principle is certainly praiseworthy. Political leaders need to be people of moral integrity, solid character and demonstrable competence but their rhetorical skills and charisma often blind voters to shortcomings which a process of closer scrutiny might reveal.
Under current circumstances the process is a minefield: such is the level of mistrust that runs through the party right now that the evaluators could open themselves to accusations of deliberate sabotage if either one of the candidates is ‘failed’. To fulfil their obligations to the statute and to the party, and indeed to the country, they are expected to carry out their scrutiny as objectively and truthfully as possible.
The process will not answer the paramount question facing the PN: whether it will have a leader with the personality, vision and leadership abilities to be viewed as an alternative prime minister by the majority of the national electorate, not simply the party electorate.