Ministers, MPs and Rip Van Winkle

Never be surprised by anything that happens in Malta. We are masters of the art of producing inexplicable situations, some of which make Rip Van Winkle, he who liked to sleep a lot, the most alert of beings around.

I say this in the context of the latest twist in the tale of the hullabaloo raised by the publication of a strong piece in a University rag (Ir-Realtà), which led to the paper's editor being charged with distributing obscenities and injuring public morals.

Through the legal digging of Owen Bonnici, the youngest MP in the House (Labour), and a lawyer, it resulted that, for years on end, the law against obscenities required that the House of Representatives should set up a committee "whose functions shall be to advise the minister responsible for justice in making regulations (under the quoted article of the law)".

The law further stipulates that "the committee shall consist of the said minister (for justice), who shall be the chairman, and four members of the House of Representatives appointed by the Prime Minister after he has consulted the Leader of the Opposition".

Would you believe it! No such committee has been appointed for decades. Bonnici has pointed out that the only time that regulations defining obscenities had been published in Malta was on July 15, 1975. Since then, said the MP, there had been a whole series of judgments by the European Court of Human Rights defining what constitutes pornography, even within the context of freedom of expression and artistic freedom.

I wonder whether Rip Van Winkle would smile at the news that various justice ministers were snoring away for longer than he did and that no MP (including yours truly) was on the ball enough to nudge them out of their deep sleep. Maybe Old Rip would prefer to let sleeping dogs lie, but he would surely smile at what happened next.

On having metaphorical cold water thrown at his face by Bonnici, Justice Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici welcomed the fact that "the voice of reason was finally prevailing over political opportunity". Mifsud Bonnici is of meeker demeanour than others of the same family who have graced the House (on both sides) with their presence. But he couldn't refrain from politicising what had not been politicised at all.

The outcry against the ham-fisted way in which the story in Ir-Realtà was handled, first by the University rector, who referred the publication and therefore its editor, a student of his, to the police, then by the latter, who brought criminal charges against the editor, Mark Camilleri, had little enough to do with politics. Voices were raised against the prosecution of Camilleri from all sides of the political spectrum. If anyone politicised the issue it was, in an inverted sense, the Justice Minister by his lack of robust action.

He should not, of course, direct the police what to do. Yet he could have murmured that he didn't like the story penned by Alex Vella Gera, a novelist, but that criminal action was not necessary. I remain of the strong opinion that it was not, and that if the case is actually heard, the court will recognise that writing about obscene men to expose their baseness in literary form is by no means an attempt to distribute obscenities and injure public morals. Rather the opposite, in fact.

As it is, the date when the case should have started being heard has passed. Apparently it was the police who asked that it should be dealt with at a later stage.

That is wise. In fact, the police should allow the House committee to be set up and to do its work, hopefully as quickly as could be, though without indecent haste. Meanwhile, there might be another smile on Rip Van Winkle's face. Mifsud Bonnici has said the Prime Minister would be nominating the government MPs to the committee shortly and he hoped the opposition would do likewise.

Coming from the side that was the latest to remain asleep over the committee, the call for speed is somewhat rich. But if it as an earnest of the minister's recognition that the matter should be dealt with urgency, it is worth noting, especially by the Police. For it is now clearer still what their course of action should be.

First let the House committee do its work. Then decide whether to continue with the action against Camilleri on the basis of the new definitions of obscenity which emerge from the wisdom of the committee, which should swing into action without delay.

It would be ludicrous for a court to deal with the charges brought forward against Camilleri on the basis of definitions formally rendered definitely outdated by the fact that the Minister of Justice himself agrees that a House of Representatives committee should be set up to produce new ones.

Extending the logic I would say that the police should also consider dropping charges given this latest turn of events.