Defending Malta’s highest institution

Respect for institutions is not conditional nor does it carry a different weight depending on the setting – be it the judicial hall or the legislative chamber. Most MPs are lawyers by profession and they fully understand that the moment they step inside the columned building at Republic Street, where Malta’s courts are housed, no disrespect can be shown or addressed to a magistrate or judge. Such decorum is not only expected but enforced without exception.

Yet, paradoxically, some of these same MPs who adhere to strict legal protocol in courtrooms choose to act differently in the House of Representatives – the highest institution of the country. This double standard is unacceptable.

Parliament is not a playground for personal political battles and members are not there to undermine the institution they were elected to serve. They are there to represent the people, to uphold the democratic process and to act in the interest of Malta – not against Malta, its government or the speaker who presides over the chamber.

For years, Malta has followed the speaker’s strict and impartial decisions, which have always been applied equally to all members, irrespective of party affiliation. However, persistent displays of disrespect by certain MPs now call for stronger action. The time has come to ensure that those who degrade the dignity of parliament face the appropriate consequences – including, if necessary, being ejected from the plenary, which deserves the highest level of respect.

Critics have often questioned the speaker’s impartiality, accusing him of favouring either the government or the opposition. However, a factual analysis of parliamentary rulings reveals a consistent application of rules rather than partisan bias. Over the years, the speaker has issued rulings that have benefited both sides of the House at different times, depending on the circumstances and the principles of parliamentary procedure.

Notably, some of his rulings have been adopted for use within the Commonwealth, reflecting their adherence to parliamentary principles and their applicability beyond Malta’s borders. This underscores the speaker’s commitment to upholding standards that resonate on an international level.

The question, therefore, is not about whether rulings are fair – because they evidently are – but, rather, why certain MPs refuse to accept them. Do opposition members seek a separate speaker who serves only their interests? Do they demand special parliamentary rules tailored to their personal and political ambitions? The role of the speaker is to serve parliament, not individual members or political factions.

Beyond Malta, the speaker has been a respected figure on the international stage, earning recognition for his leadership and representation of parliamentary democracy. Here are some of his notable achievements:

Presidency of the Small Nations within the Commonwealth: As the first speaker to hold this prestigious role, he effectively led discussions on challenges facing smaller legislative bodies, ensuring their voices were heard.

President of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) Forum within the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU): This role has further demonstrated his ability to influence international legislative discussions and position Malta at the forefront of humanitarian law debates.

Twice elected to the Speaker’s Conference: His peers have recognised his expertise and leadership by electing him twice to the Speaker’s Conference, reflecting the high regard in which he is held within parliamentary circles. These positions of global significance are a testament to his capabilities, leadership and unwavering commitment to legislative excellence.

Discipline and decorum are the cornerstones of any functioning legislative body. However, recent unruly behaviour by certain MPs has raised questions about the erosion of respect for parliamentary norms. Some opposition members, notably Karol Aquilina, have exhibited conduct that goes beyond healthy political debate and instead verges on outright defiance of parliamentary order.

Any MP who disrespects the speaker, fellow members, or the institution should face consequences, including possible suspension from proceedings- Alicia Bugeja Said

Parliamentary discipline should be enforced equally on all members, regardless of political affiliation. When a member disrupts proceedings, refuses to comply with rulings or engages in disorderly conduct, there must be clear consequences, just as in any legal or professional institution. The rules of engagement within parliament are not optional nor should they be selectively applied.

To ensure that Malta’s highest institution is respected and safeguarded, certain measures should be strictly enforced.

Upholding the authority of the speaker: No MP should be allowed to undermine the speaker’s position. Any behaviour that disrespects the speaker’s rulings or disrupts the chamber must be immediately addressed through established disciplinary measures.

Uniform application of parliamentary discipline: Rules should be applied consistently, regardless of party affiliation. Any MP who disrespects the speaker, fellow members or the institution itself should face clear consequences, including possible suspension from proceedings.

Ejection of MPs who degrade the institution: If disrespect towards the plenary persists, those engaging in such behaviour should be removed from the chamber immediately. The plenary is a place of national importance, not a forum for theatrics.

Strengthening enforcement of decorum: Persistent disorderly conduct should trigger automatic sanctions without prolonged deliberation, ensuring a structured and disciplined approach to governance.

At the heart of this discussion lies a fundamental truth – respect for democratic institutions is absolute and must be upheld in all forums, whether it be the courts or the House of Representatives. The same MPs who practise strict deference in courtrooms should hold themselves to the same standard of respect within parliament, the very institution that gives them the power to legislate.

For years, Malta has witnessed the speaker making strict and fair decisions towards all MPs regardless of political affiliation. However, recent blatant disrespect towards the speaker and the plenary makes it imperative to take stronger action.

The time has come to see MPs who display contempt for the institution ejected from the plenary, if necessary – because the highest legislative chamber in the country deserves the utmost respect.

The ongoing attacks against the speaker are not just political but institutional in nature. They seek to diminish the credibility of the highest office in parliament and create a dangerous precedent where rulings are only respected when they align with certain MPs’ interests.

However, the speaker’s track record speaks for itself – three legislatures of unwavering commitment, balanced rulings, international recognition and a steadfast defence of Malta’s parliamentary system. His leadership remains untouched by partisan gamesmanship, and the credibility of Malta’s highest institution must be defended against those who seek to weaken it.

The time has come to reinforce discipline within parliament. Respect for the speaker and for fellow MPs must be non-negotiable, ensuring that Malta’s legislative body continues to function with the dignity and authority it deserves.

Parliament is the heart of democracy and those who refuse to uphold its decorum should no longer be given the privilege of remaining within it.

Alicia Bugeja Said is Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries, Aquaculture and Animal Rights.