In the stand they have both adopted in the nomination of a new commissioner for standards in public life, the prime minister and his direct political adversary have put their pride before the national interest.
Surely they can reach a consensus on one of the many names now on the table.
But, no, they have decided to dig their heels in. Given the strong majority enjoyed by the government in parliament, it will have the upper hand but that will not necessarily mean its choice will be the best one either.
How can the two sides fail to agree on a new standards commissioner when it had appeared to be such a smooth affair when the first office holder was chosen? Former Nationalist MP George Hyzler was selected with the blessing of the Labour parliamentary group, saying the government had shown its determination to improve governance and transparency in the country.
Sadly, that determination did not last very long and Hyzler soon realised it was an uphill battle trying to raise the bar of standards in public life. That could very well be the reason behind Robert Abela’s resolve to stick to his nominee this time round.
The two sides did agree on a new ombudsman. Is it because the ombudsman can bark but not really bite, while a focused standards commissioner can rock the boat considerably?
Having said that, Judge Joseph Zammit McKeon, the ombudsman designate, is certainly his own man and will not mind calling a spade a spade. The bone of contention is Chief Justice Emeritus Joseph Azzopardi, the prime minister’s nominee for standards commissioner.
One may perhaps wonder whether former judges are the best people to occupy such posts as they may be tempted to only stick to the word of the law in their deliberations. However, by basing his objection to Azzopardi on grounds of efficiency – because when he was chief justice the backlog of appeals had reached extremely high levels – the opposition leader is opening a can of worms. If Grech is truly worried about this issue, and since justice delayed is justice denied, he should force a thorough and serious review of the prevailing situation so that any erring members of the judiciary are either brought in line or removed.
Whatever Grech’s reasons for his objection, the situation is now in a stalemate. To break the impasse, Abela is proposing to amend the law so the standards commissioner can be appointed by simple rather than a two-thirds majority.
The Venice Commission had recommended an anti-deadlock mechanism when there is disagreement on nominations for president or chief justice. In the case of the president, it suggested this would take the form of an absolute majority vote after two failed attempts at a two-thirds majority. For the chief justice, judges of the supreme court could make their own choice through a vote.
In a review of the Standards in Public Life Act last year, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also suggested a sensible deadlock-breaking mechanism to avoid a long-term vacancy. In its view, should parliament fail to choose a commissioner, the Judicial Appointments Committee could make “a binding recommendation” to the president.
The changes Abela is proposing would allow government MPs to appoint a standards commissioner of the prime minister’s own choice, by a simple majority if two initial votes fail to garner a two-thirds majority.
May better sense prevail even at this late stage. Both sides need to put the national interest first. The president could use his influence too.