Article 4 of the Standards in Public Life Act states that a commissioner shall be appointed by the President of Malta acting in accordance with a resolution of the House of Representatives supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the House.
The above law clearly stipulates how a standards commissioner should be appointed but our prime minister, rather than doing his utmost to abide by this law in order to safeguard the principles of democracy, has proposed a bill to appoint the commissioner with a simple majority. No wonder that many have criticised this move as being undemocratic and reducing public trust in the office.
It is stated that the commissioner for standards in public life investigates breaches of ethical standards by ministers, MPs and persons of trust and contributes to the improvement of standards of behaviour in public life.
One rightly queries how can the person in such a role, who is supposed to investigate ministers and MPs, be nominated by the members themselves? The adage goes that “justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done”.
It is not enough for Robert Abela to publicly state that he believes that the person nominated for this post has the qualifications, experience and integrity to serve in the role. Even if, for argument’s sake, former chief justice Joseph
Azzopardi, who has been nominated by the government, has all the required skills, once the law stipulates that he has to be appointed by not less than two-thirds of all MPs, parliament should abide by this statute.
And the candidate who has been nominated, in this case Azzopardi, should, of his own will, refuse to take up the post unless he is appointed, as the law stipulates, by two-thirds of all the members of the parliament.
Former chief justice Joseph Azzopardi should refuse to be appointed standards commissioner unless he has the backing of two-thirds of MPs- Ray Azzopardi
This is the way that democracy should function. To try and rewrite the rules of the game in order to suit one’s interests and come out victorious is not democratic at all. This is what Abela is doing in order to get his nominee approved.
“It always helps to have the referees on your side,” Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt state in their book How Democracies Die, which demonstrates how elected leaders shatter the institutions that are supposed to constrain them. The authors argue that “by capturing the referees... and rewriting the rules of the game, elected leaders can establish a decisive – and permanent – advantage over their opponents”.
For the government to try at all costs to get its nominee approved rather than go that extra mile to reach a consensus on such an important role baffles those of us who are always hoping that reason and justice will supersede partisanship.
To have both the government and the opposition agree on anything seems to be a taboo. Both parties are always at loggerheads with one another. More time is spent accusing one another of partisanship than trying to find a solution.
Opposition leader Bernard Grech rightly rebutted in parliament before the first vote was taken. He argued: “This was a discussion about what standards we want in our politics, in our parliament, in our country. But Abela wanted to choose the referee all by himself. He wanted to choose the person who is tasked with investigating us himself.”
Though the bill being presented by the government is labelled as ‘an anti-deadlock mechanism’ to be able to solve the impasse over the appointment of a standards commissioner, which has been going on for the past few weeks, it is seen by many as a move to undermine democracy.
Nominations for such important public roles should be put forward by independent bodies and not left to the leaders of the two main parties. Unless our politicians sincerely try to abide by democratic rules that are in place to safeguard our way of governing, there is no hope that there will be any step forward, as a nation, in our democratic process. Rewriting the rules to suit our agenda is going against the letter and spirit of our institutions.
No written law is self-sufficient and self-encompassing. We should be the ones who respect and adhere to the spirit of democratic laws. Let no person accept such public roles unless, as being stipulated by the law itself, he/she is being voted for by not less than two-thirds of the House.
Ray Azzopardi is a former headmaster.