Less than two months after Daphne Caruana Galizia was assassinated by a powerful car bomb, President George Vella had spoken about making decisions with “a serene conscience”.
Just days after the public inquiry into the murder published its findings, he again referred to his conscience, telling Times of Malta: “As head of state, I can assure you that I am doing my duty with a clear conscience.”
Vella is a former cabinet minister in Joseph Muscat’s administration, held responsible for nurturing a culture of impunity facilitating the journalist’s brutal killing. Thus, on a personal level as a politician, he can only have a “serene” and “clear” conscience if he assumes full responsibility for the “grave omissions” the inquiry board attributed to the cabinet.
Speaking about abortion earlier this year, Vella declared: “I will never sign a bill that involves the authorisation of murder.” The three judges conducting the inquiry commented that the cabinet on which he sat had been more focused on the generation of wealth concentrated in the hands of a small group of trusted people than defending those in manifest danger because they were fulfilling their duty. Refusing to assume political responsibility for Caruana Galizia’s murder, the president can justifiably be accused of making a distinction between the value of life of an unborn and that of an adult.
His constitutional position as head of state then comes into question for it now falls upon him to ensure that the country’s institutions work to ensure the rule of law prevails and that a robust system of checks and balances is in place guaranteeing good governance.
“What happened cannot, ever, be justified. We need to be united in the hope that all those who have to shoulder the responsibility for their behaviour, do exactly that, and pay the consequences. Whoever this may be.” Wise words, indeed, uttered by Vella himself on Republic Day in 2019.
Then, he could have been excused for not going any further because he could have been accused of acting on mere allegations.
Now, however, he has the comfort and support of a voluminous, well-studied inquiry conducted by three learned judges whose findings and recommendations are crystal clear.
On assuming office two years ago, Vella had acknowledged that one of his foremost duties as president is to be guarantor of the constitution. “My duty,” he had solemnly enunciated, “is to preserve the constitution and see that it is respected. The same applies to our constitutional structures that are so necessary for the fulfilment of democracy and rule of law.”
The constitution may not clearly define the duties of the president. However, it does say that the executive authority of Malta is vested in the president. He can exercise such authority either directly or through officers subordinate to him.
He was right when he declared that the Republic of Malta is far bigger than “the gang of people who bought shame on our country”.
The president must stop saying he is doing his duty “with a clear conscience” and working behind the scenes.
If conscience is to be considered as the final arbiter, then one might as well do away with prosecution of all types of wrongdoers and crime “because everyone would defend himself by claiming he was following the dictates of his conscience, ‘the final arbiter’”.
Vella would certainly agree with that because he wrote it in an article on abortion a few months after Caruana Galizia was eliminated. Vella surely knows what he must do to clear his conscience.