For the first time since the index was created in 2006, the state of Malta’s democracy has been downgraded from a so-called “full democracy” to the “flawed” category by The Economist. In its annual assessment of 167 countries around the world, Malta stands in 26th position.
The near-universal conviction that democracy is preferable to any other form of governance is such that in many political contexts ‘democratic’ has become synonymous with ‘legitimate’.
It is therefore surprising that the list of those countries rated as “flawed” includes some surprising bed-fellows, among them the United States (which most would regard as the “greatest democracy on earth”), Hong Kong (whose people appear to be fighting for a democratic future), and a host of European countries.
To make these observations is not to cast doubt on The Economist’s judgement of Malta’s performance in 2019 but simply to highlight the tricky job of drawing conclusions from what appears to be a ticks-in-the-box exercise.
The categories considered by the researchers included “political participation” (Malta’s lowest score at 6.11); “functioning of government” (7.5), “political culture” (8.11), “civil liberties” (where Malta scored 8.82); and “the electoral process and pluralism” (Malta’s highest score of 9.17). The country’s overall score of 7.95 was the lowest since the index started being put together.
The Democracy Index editor said that one of the main reasons for the result was the poor functioning of Malta’s government, “particularly weaknesses in the rule of law and an inadequate system of checks and balances… The flawed handling of the investigations by the government and Malta’s institutions [into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia which] have exposed fundamental deficiencies in the political and institutional environment in Malta… Corruption appears to be embedded at a high level… The ‘golden passport scheme’… had spawned corrupt ties among Malta’s business, finance and political communities.”
Few would argue with any of Ms Hoey’s justification. The Democracy Index result is inescapable. And so is the consistently low scoring given to Malta on the global corruption index compiled by Transparency International, whose Western Europe coordinator was equally clear: Malta’s regulatory systems and scrutiny have not kept up with economic prosperity, with rule of law suffering as a result.
If Malta’s democratic credentials are to be restored, the new prime minister must initiate much-needed overdue constitutional and institutional reforms, including greater checks and balances in the conduct of his own office. He must find ways of strengthening Malta’s institutions by attracting people of calibre to fill pivotal roles. He must eradicate traces of corruption and maladministration and introduce greater transparency and accountability. The imperatives of implementing wide-ranging constitutional and institutional changes and re-establishing the values of good governance and the rule of law must be paramount.
The Convention on the Constitution, whose work under President George Vella has been badly stalled by the deeply unsettling events of the last two months, must start delivering on its mandate with urgency.
The Foreign Ministry pointed out The Economist’s report was written before Robert Abela “started addressing effectively the issues of good governance”.
We will be holding the government to its word.