Letters to the editor - July 7, 2024

Praise where due

I tend to write when things here in Malta shock or anger me but I felt compelled to write on a much more positive note this time.

I wanted to congratulate the organisers of the Ed Sheeran concert last week, especially the inspired idea to put on special coaches to and from the venue.

We left from Pembroke and boarding was smooth and painless. As soon as a coach was full, it departed on a designated special route which, while it took a little longer, meant we were not stood in stationary traffic. The return journey was equally straightforward and even quicker.

I do believe this type of arrangement should be made for other major events. For once, a traffic management system worked.

 For future events, the organisers might give some thought to multiple entrances and queuing systems. While we had seated tickets and did not experience much queuing, there were only two single queues for all the standing ticket holders (many more than us seated attendees) and only four bag checks queues for 35,000 people. Similarly, there was only one exit for everyone.

If separate access and exits could be organised for different ticket holders, it would enhance the whole experience even further.

Many thanks again for a job well done.

JANET WOJTKOW – St Julian’s

A just and equitable society

Automatically imposing a curfew as a bail condition for alleged minor infractions of the law raises significant ethical and practical concerns. Here’s a reasoned argument against such a measure:

1. Disproportionate response: a curfew is a restrictive measure typically reserved for serious offences or individuals deemed a significant risk to society. Applying it to minor infractions is disproportionate and undermines the principle of proportionality in justice. It treats minor offenders as if they pose the same level of risk as those accused of more serious crimes, which is unjust.

2. Violation of personal liberty: curfews restrict individuals’ freedom of movement and infringe upon their personal liberties. For minor infractions, such restrictions are unjustified and unnecessarily intrusive. Everyone should have the right to move freely within reasonable bounds, and imposing a curfew for minor offences encroaches upon this fundamental right without due cause.

3. Impact on livelihood: many minor offenders may have jobs or responsibilities that require them to be out during the evening or nighttime hours. Imposing a curfew could disrupt their ability to maintain employment, support their families, or fulfil other essential obligations. This disproportionate impact on their livelihoods exacerbates the injustice of using a curfew as a bail condition for minor infractions.

4. Stigmatisation and discrimination: applying a curfew to minor offenders can stigmatise them and perpetuate negative stereotypes. It suggests that they are inherently dangerous or untrustworthy, contributing to social marginalisation and discrimination. Such stigmatisation can have long-term consequences for an individuals’ personal and professional lives, further perpetuating cycles of disadvantage and inequality.

5. Erosion of trust in the justice system: using curfews for minor infractions undermines public trust in the fairness and effectiveness of the justice system. It sends the message that the system is arbitrary and punitive rather than focused on rehabilitation and proportionate consequences. This erosion of trust can have far-reaching implications for community cooperation with law enforcement and adherence to the rule of law.

6. Resource allocation: imposing curfews for minor infractions diverts resources away from addressing more pressing issues within the justice system. Limited resources should be allocated to preventing and addressing serious crimes rather than monitoring individuals accused of minor infractions. Using curfews inappropriately consumes valuable resources that could be better utilised elsewhere.

In conclusion, imposing a curfew as a bail condition for alleged minor infractions of the law is unjust, disproportionate and undermines fundamental principles of fairness, personal liberty and trust in the justice system.

Alternative measures that focus on rehabilitation, community support and addressing the root causes of minor offences would be more appropriate and effective in promoting a just and equitable society.

GODFREY GAUCI MAISTRE –Valletta