Following a thorough debate on the bill to amend the Constitution of Malta as regards the retirement age of judges and magistrates, the House of Representatives unanimously agreed to make this bill a landmark piece of legislation.

There is no doubt that the extension of the retirement age of the members of the judiciary has been an issue which has been discussed for several years but I can say that no government, before today, has ever taken the decision to grab the bull by the horns and decide.

The most important recent reform that took place with regard to the judiciary was certainly that of 2016. This was when the Labour administration significantly improved the financial conditions of both judges and magistrates and their pensions, something that was deserved and long overdue.

I want to congratulate all the judges and magistrates for their dedication and sense of duty to our country. For the most part, and over a long period of time, the judiciary have always done its duty wisely and with dignity.

Before reaching 65, members of the judiciary shall be at liberty to decide whether to remain in office until the age of 68. If so, they would need to notify the President of Malta and the chief justice of such a decision.

I recall that this reform had often been called for, including under a previous PN administration in 2010 when Judge Carmel Agius told Times of Malta “judges should not be forced to retire when they were in their prime and should be allowed to serve”.

Former chief justice Vincent De Gaetano had also said in his address at the opening of the forensic year in 2009 that the retirement age should be raised to 68.

One may wonder why now. What advantages will citizens gain from all this, all the more so that the same citizen should be at the centre of any decision taken, even in the judicial field?

With the support of Prime Minister Robert Abela and all members of the government, I have come to this decision for several reasons.

The first reason is that, had we not made up our minds and decided on this issue, we would have lost almost immediately three judges currently serving in the highest court of the country who were about to retire. This meant that a pool of knowledge and experience would be lost, experience that would be difficult to replace notwithstanding the appointment of new judges. Anyone who is familiar with this area is very well aware that a judge also needs a lot of time to gain experience in the role.

The second reason is the massive backlog which accumulated over the years and which sits on the desk of the Court of Appeal (superior jurisdiction). This will serve as a guarantee that more judgments will be delivered and this is one of many that will be undertaken in this regard, such as the important procedural amendments in chapter 12 of the Laws of Malta, which I have already tabled with the Clerk of the House.

This is the government of the rule of law, good governance and checks and balances- Edward Zammit Lewis

Efficiency in the judicial sector is my main objective. I must say that Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti has been fully cooperative on the matter and we see this as a common objective. It should also be noted that, compared to the average countries in Europe and in the democratically advanced countries of the world, the age of 65 is relatively low.

Finally, there is no doubt that, when considering all the medical advances that have taken place over the years, a person over the age of 65 still has a lot to give to the country.

This legislative amendment has been drafted in such a way that it does not affect the independence and impartiality of any judicial member, rather, it strengthens our judiciary.

One of the founders of the United States of America in ‘The Federalist’ (1788) said: “The complete independence of the courts of justice is particularly essential in a limited constitution.”

The permanence of the term of office of a judge is a component of the security of tenure. It is good to learn from other member states in the European Union, especially from what they have done in this field. The Court of Justice of the European Union decided a year ago this month in favour of legislation similar to our own, insofar as there is no discrimination based on gender or age for judges.

It underscored of the importance of the basic values ​​on which the Union is built, including the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. It is on this basis that Malta received praise for the constitutional and institutional reforms undertaken in recent months.

Among such reforms was the process to appointment judges and magistrates, which process consists of the  Judicial Appointments Committee recommending the candidate and,  following this recommendation, the nominated person shall be appointed  by the President of Malta.

The appointment of the chief justice was also commended since the chief justice is appointed by the president on the recommendation of the two-thirds of the votes in the House of Representatives.

There is no doubt that this initiative is another link in a chain of reforms that will lead to a stronger, more efficient and more resilient judiciary making it more accountable in order to ensure that every Maltese and Gozitan is getting the justice they deserve and within a reasonable time.

This is the government of the rule of law, good governance and checks and balances on everyone because no one is above the law.

This is a government that strengthened and continues to strengthen the judiciary.

This is a government that listens, a Robert Abela administration, which conducted, in just 10 months, unprecedented constitutional and institutional reforms lauded by everyone, including the president of the European Commission.

Edward Zammit Lewis is Minister for Justice.