Trust is the most fragile of commodities. It takes little to break it but much longer to restore it.
Malta’s reputation is being dragged through the mud. On show for all to see are its weak public governance, sordid tales of corruption and state capture and the murder of an investigative journalist which, on the evidence so far, appears to have been set in motion by a rogue businessman protected by people occupying high public office.
The Maltese public is becoming so accustomed to the long list of abuses of power that occurred on former prime minister Joseph Muscat’s watch that many are no longer shocked by new revelations coming out of various court cases, inquiries and investigative new reports, each more scandalous than the last.
Some have long been resigned to holding their politicians to the lowest of ethical standards so long as they keep money flowing in the economy.
Under the new prime minister, Robert Abela, some changes have been made. Flawed legislation has been updated to create an impression that sound governance principles are now being adhered to. The courts are suddenly flooded with cases of money laundering and other financial crimes.
What will also be crucial, though, is a change in political culture. For too long, it has been one of undermining checks and balances that should be the pillars of a functioning democracy. New laws and belated police action are not enough to eradicate that culture.
The government’s attempts to rescue what little is left of Malta’s reputation in international circles have so far not convinced. This was evident in the comments made by numerous MEPs when the European Parliament on Thursday evening discussed developments related to the revelations emerging from the Maltese courts. Abela’s narrative on his reforms seems only to have impressed Labour’s four MEPs, who returned to the same old arguments when trying to rebut the criticism.
Alfred Sant repeated the mantra that the EU uses two weights and two measures when dealing with alleged abuse of power in different member states. Cyrus Engerer argued that the debate was instigated by “people in a frenzy” to score points before the general election. Alex Agius Saliba said the institutions are working.
On the other side, Nationalist MEP Roberta Metsola appealed to her fellow parliamentarians not to judge Malta by the “actions of criminals posing as politicians”. Her colleague, David Casa alleged the people running the country were “working in concert with organised crime”.
The wheels of justice move slowly and this will only delay the restoration of our reputation.
Criminal action has been taken against those alleged to be directly involved in the murder but claims about senior politicians having a say in this and other unsolved crimes have, so far, not led to any prosecutions.
Meanwhile, Muscat brazenly argues that he is the victim of the Egrant allegations and wants to clear his family’s name. His former chief-of-staff, Keith Schembri, also plays the victim, alleging that the delayed criminal charges against him are a result of pressure exerted by the imminent Moneyval decision on whether to grey list Malta.
In the meantime, there are no signs of contrition from the prime minister. Malta’s reputation will remain in the dock so long as the country continues to be perceived as tolerant of corrupt practices and abuse of power.
The debate in the European Parliament has demonstrated that the only way to change that perception is by lifting impunity once and for all from anyone who once enjoyed, or continues to enjoy, political power.