It is positive that the recent launch of the government’s Anti-Racism Strategy (2021-2023) has sparked off a debate on racism and the response to it and I take Therese Comodini Cachia’s article ‘Addressing racism in Malta’ (October 28) in that spirit.

As Comodini Cachia undoubtedly knows, a strategy like this sits under a typology known as ‘NAPAR’ (national action plan against racism). The document launched on September 30 of this year is the first official Maltese NAPAR. What she refers to from 2010 are reports and drafts and, in reference to them, she carefully chooses her words: first, that the equality body had launched what it referred to as Malta’s first NAPAR and, second, that this strategy comes 11 years after the one published by the equality body in 2010.

It would be nice to have a NAPAR just by publishing one; in reality, it is far more complex than that, if one is committed to achieving full implementation. What I am stating is confirmed by the Fundamental Rights Agency’s 2020 Fundamental Rights report which, reporting on 2019, does not list Malta as having a NAPAR. Here we are, two years later, filling that gap.

Comodini Cachia also states that the 2010 draft (a good document which, however, just remained on a shelf) “is rather similar to the first national anti-racism strategy” launched a month ago. Indeed, most NAPARs the world over look “rather similar” to each other. Just like integration policies, gender equality policies and many more.

While the process differs depending on the national context, common principles and good practice in terms of solutions inform national efforts of developing and implementing a NAPAR. I reject outright any other possible interpretation of “rather similar”. Comodini Cachia can ask today’s experts and practitioners and will confirm this.

I agree that it is the role of civil society “to ensure that all actions are executed in an efficient and effective manner”. Civil society was, and is, heavily involved at all stages of the strategy. When the technical group working on the process was set up in April 2020, it was composed of an equal number of experts from the Human Rights Directorate (HRD) and from civil society. During the ‘public consultation in preparation for a national action plan against racism and xenophobia’ that was held during the fourth quarter of 2020 we met with a wide spectrum of civil society organisations.

And, last July, we set the ball rolling with the Anti-Racism Platform, composed entirely of representatives of civil society and, so far, have already held three meetings (with a fourth one in the coming days). Leadership of the platform is being handed over to an NGO, to ensure “critical reflection on the ongoing implementation of this strategy to serve its ongoing evolution as found to be required” (Measure n.3).

Civil society was, and is, heavily involved at all stages of the strategy- Alexander Tortell

I wish to stress that, throughout the process leading up to the strategy, HRD and our partners have also been very attentive to conduct a process fully in line with recommendations and best practices in the field of NAPARs from international institutions (such as OHCHR) and international civil society (such as ENAR), keeping in mind local contexts, expertise and resources. Council of Europe experts in intercultural inclusion contributed heavily to the final redaction.

This professional and expert approach to anti-racism will continue throughout implementation. We take an active part in EU bodies monitoring the design and implementation of NAPARs across the EU, in line with the EU anti-racism action plan. And HRD has just been awarded an EU-funded project to support the implementation of the strategy whose partners include the NCPE, University of Malta, NCPE, Kopin, Diversit and the European Network Against Racism.

Undoubtedly, we still have much to learn and I am sure we will have to revise our approach here and there in light of the experience we will gain throughout implementation but I believe we are on the right track. We have, indeed, been repeatedly stressing from day one of the process that this is not a document about immigration but about Maltese society, nowadays more multicultural and diverse than ever. It is a strategy that addresses through tangible measures the intersectional dimension of discrimination. Some measures take more time than others to bear the desired fruit. In my opinion, what is important is that we are kicking off implementation of all measures.

I will be more than happy to discuss in further detail with Comodini Cachia and avail of her expertise. However, more than anything, I ask her to join us in supporting in a concrete way the implementation of Measure 15, which concerns her field of society, so to speak.

This measure states: “Political parties carry a responsibility to shape political discourse on sensitive topics such as immigration, inclusion, patriotism and others. While in no shape or manner hindering that robust debate and even sharp disagreement that characterises a healthy democracy, this measure will commit political parties to a pact for zero tolerance to racist language, sanctionable by internal ethics and disciplinary boards. Political parties will, furthermore, adopt this standard in the vetting of candidates and organise regular training for party administrations, officials and candidates.”

Alexander Tortell is head, Intercultural and Anti-Racism Unit, Human Rights Directorate.