Activists from both the pro-life and pro-choice camps have welcomed the new president’s comments on abortion – for different reasons – but none have backed the idea of referendum to decide the issue.

No matter its outcome, a referendum would not change the fact that abortion is the killing of babies, lead pro-life activist and Life Network Foundation CEO Miriam Sciberras told Times of Malta in a reaction to Myriam Spiteri Debono’s comments.

And pro-choice and Women’s Rights Foundation lead activist Andrea Dibben said important decisions on abortion should be shouldered by the government and not made through a referendum.

In an interview with Times of Malta on Sunday, president Myriam Spiteri Debono said she was personally against abortion and insisted that even as president, she had a right to freedom of conscience like everyone else.

But she would not say whether she would sign an abortion law if it were to land on her desk. Rather, she said, a referendum would be the fairest way to decide the contentious issue.

“Let’s not be delusional about this – just like it was introduced in other countries, it will eventually be introduced [here as well],” she said.

But she made it clear that if it is ever to be introduced it should “not be snuck in through the window in some electoral manifesto”.

Contacted for a reaction yesterday, Dibben said that as the president acknowledged, it was only a matter of time until Malta caught up with its European counterparts and decriminalised abortion.

But, she added, “issues of human rights should not be put to a majority vote”.

“The government should shoulder its responsibility and make important decisions following consultations, but not a referendum.

“I would, however, welcome a forum such as a citizens’ assembly which would allow space for information sharing and dialogue.”

Dibben is part of the Women’s Rights Foundation, which is a member of the Voice for Choice Coalition.

Pro-lifer Sciberras said it was encouraging to see that Spiteri Debono was against abortion “because that means she is aware of what abortion does – that it kills a baby”.

“The fact that she also insisted on her freedom of conscience also shows that in principle she is in favour of life, and a principle like that will guide her through many major decisions she may have to make,” Sciberras said when asked to react to the news.

“A referendum is irrelevant because no matter its result, abortion will never cease to be the murder of a baby. No referendum, no matter its outcome, can ever justify abortion.”

Sciberras said that, rather, the pro-life movement should work tirelessly to educate people and provide the best possible services to women, so that opting for life will be every woman’s natural option and no mother will ever have to consider abortion.

The association of pro-life doctors – Doctors for Life – also welcomed the fact that “this president personally recognises the right to life of unborn children”.

“We reaffirm that abortion involves the intentional killing of an established human life with his or her own genetic identity. Any discussion regarding this intervention should be made in the light of the above,” a spokesperson for the organisation said.

“We are a sovereign nation and we should never allow the value that other countries place on their unborn children to compromise the protection of our own. We must continue to persevere in protecting the vulnerable and weak in society, something that seems central to the values of this president.”

The association’s counterpart, Doctors for Choice, said Spiteri Debono’s comments were an “acknowledgement that the country is making progress and that abortion will eventually be legalised here as well.

“We also welcome the fact that she did not lay down any red lines on this issue. We encourage politicians to tackle this issue and to bring Malta’s abortion law in line with the recommendations of the World Health Organisation and the Council of Europe.”

Neither of these associations would comment on the president’s suggestion for a referendum.

Malta has the strictest anti-abortion laws in the EU. An attempt to amend the criminal code, allowing abortion to take place if a woman’s life or health is in danger, was shot down last year.

Months later, the wording was changed to allow an abortion only if a woman’s life is in “immediate danger” or if her health is in “grave jeopardy that may lead to death”.