Claims that a new board empowered to inflict fines in cases of discrimination would be unconstitutional, were described as completely unfounded by Equality Minister Edward Zammit Lewis.

“Prior to tabling the Bill we had been given the thumbs up by the Attorney General and sought the advice of legal experts,” he said in Parliament on Monday.

Dr Zammit Lewis was reacting to criticism levelled by Opposition MP Clyde Puli during the second reading of the Equality Bill which will complement a separate one providing for the establishment of The Human Rights and Equality Commission. The Equality Bill was unanimously approved at second reading stage.

This commission will comprise a “quasi-judiciary” Equality Board which will have the remit to look into or initiate investigations into discrimination claims and award remedies including moral damages of up to €10,000. This entity will replace the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality.

Opposition warns Bill may be challenged

Mr Puli said the Opposition would be voting in favour at second reading stage, but would be tabling amendments at committee stage.

The PN MP warned that this Bill was unconstitutional and cautioned that its existence could be short-lived as it could be legally challenged.

His concerns were based on two landmark judgments, in which the Constitutional Court had ruled that only a proper court could inflict administrative fines, as such sanctions were of criminal nature.

These judgments involved the Federation of Estate Agents against the Director for Competition in 2016 and a case which the Nationalist Party had instituted against the Electoral Commission.

Bill reflects Attorney General's legal advice

In his winding-up speech, the Equality Minister refuted Mr Puli’s claims. He said the Bill had been drafted on the basis of the legal advice of the Attorney General and other experts in the field.

Dr Zammit Lewis insisted that Mr Puli was giving a wrong interpretation of these judgments.

“These did not say one has to seek redress in a proper court but an entity which has the same safeguards as a court,” he said.

“This is why the method of appointment of the commission’s chair will be similar to that of the members of the judiciary in terms of their security of tenure,” he added.

Under this Bill, the chairman would be appointed by a two-thirds parliamentary majority, following an open call presided by the Speaker.

The candidates would be grilled by a select committee of MPs, and just like the Ombudsman's Office, the commission would be answerable to Parliament.

Government to table amendments

Reacting to concerns raised by other Opposition MPs, who said that this Bill would go a step too far, Dr Zammit Lewis said the government wanted to enact an “ambitious” law.

Consequently, a degree of resistance from certain quarters would be expected, he said.

However, he noted that the government would table certain amendments at committee stage, in the wake of certain points raised by Opposition MPs including Therese Comodini Cachia, Claudette Buttigieg and Carm Mifsud Bonnici.

 

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.