Joseph Muscat, whose actions and inactions as prime minister have by now been laid bare, persists in portraying himself as defender of the institutions.

Of course, he protects them provided they do his bidding.

He decided that former Infrastructure Malta CEO Fredrick Azzopardi should not have been arraigned and charged with violating environment protection laws. Freedom of expression, that same right the culture of impunity prevalent on his watch wanted to stifle, allows him to speak his mind and criticise.

But he does not have the right to tell public officers what they should do or not do.

Perhaps he needs reminding what the public inquiry into Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder concluded about the exercise of his function as head of government and guarantor of good governance.

Commenting on the way he had protected his right-hand man, Keith Schembri, the inquiry concluded that Muscat’s attitude was unacceptable, condemnable and amounted to a serious shortcoming and abuse.

So how can he speak of wanting to defend the institutions or expecting to tell public functionaries how to operate? If he truly wants to defend institutions he must also uphold the laws that govern them. Defending an individual before a single shred of evidence has been heard smacks of desperation.

If Muscat thinks, as he did in his Facebook post on Azzopardi’s arraignment, the institutions are crumbling, he has only himself to blame. If you sow the wind, you are likely to reap the whirlwind.

What cheek to accuse institutions of caving in to “a little pressure” when he himself resorts to talk verging on the subversive.

“Our voice,” he wrote in his post, “is not that of one shouting in the wilderness but the deafening sound of thousands who, although silent, cannot be mistaken to be fools.”

Muscat warned “we too have a voice, and it is the voice of thousands who should not be taken for fools because they have thus far remained silent”. While clearly the sorry crowd which appeared outside court yesterday is no reflection of Muscat’s popularity, such a statement reeks of the very dangerous ‘might is right’ myth. 

What Muscat resorted to are bullying tactics, his antics soon emulated by the likes of Jason Micallef and Manuel Cuschieri. In the past, elements of the Labour Party also resorted to public bullying, which led to the darkest political chapters of our recent history.

In his Facebook post, Muscat also speaks of “tick the box exercises”. You take action to appear to be doing something and then let the court decide.

Any action, especially by the police, should, of course, be based on robust investigations. Dare we say Muscat is partially right because we still see too many people being marched to court, being humiliated and scarred for life, when the police work which led to their arraignment appears to be flimsy.  But it is rich when the claim is made from a former prime minister under whom investigations into widespread crimes went conspicuously silent.

It seems he continues to think he remains the ‘emperor’ when institutions’ strings were pulled from Castille.

It, therefore, suffices reminding him what former chief justice Silvio Camilleri had said in his final official address before his retirement.

In the past, the wise jurist had recalled, the ruler, who considered himself to be the sovereign, ruled supreme. Today, the recognised sovereign in a democratic state is the law, hence, the rule of law.

There is no more room for bullies.