The editorial of July 2 (‘The Central Bank’s dark vaults’) was based on flawed logic and a poor appreciation of the concept of Central Bank autonomy.

How could the government take the lead in declaring that my name was being taken off the shortlist of candidates being considered for governor of the Central Bank of Malta when it had never made any public declarations about who was on the shortlist?

I made the decision to insist on not being considered for the post after media leaks referred to my being under consideration and a favourite for it.

The Times of Malta repeated the argument made by certain quarters that once I refused to be considered further for the post of governor of the Central Bank, then I should relinquish my post as deputy governor. If am no good for governor, I should not be good for deputy governor, the simplistic argument goes. Some have suggested I should suspend myself until the allegations made against me can be investigated.

Suspension from the post of deputy governor is not possible either at law or in practice.

The Central Bank Act provides for the position to be occupied in the interest of the organisation. If we were talking about a few days or weeks of absence, that could be practical, but legal processes take more than that. The libel case I filed has been set for the first hearing in late October 2016. So the real option is staying or leaving.

Let me explain why I thought that the interest of the organisation demanded I withdraw my name from consideration for appointment as governor.

The charges against me are serious, even if untrue and fabricated, with a scope of causing maximum damage, motivated by hate and vendetta resulting from the hurt of a failed relationship and my refusal to give in to blackmail to extract a financial settlement that is not due.

Pursuing the governorship under such conditions would harm the organisation, which is bigger, much bigger, than the individual. Well-wishers have protested that this is unfair, but then who said that the world is a fair place?

But does not the same apply for the position of deputy governor, the simple argument goes. Yes, the same principle of the organisation being bigger than the individual applies. I would be harming the organisation much more by leaving than by staying, I explain.

The post of governor and of deputy governor have security of tenure, and the government cannot remove those appointed during their term of office unless found guilty of a serious offence. Much less can the Opposition.

So by giving in to claims to resign, I would bring into question the independence and autonomy of the Central Bank, which is fiercely defended by law and by the ECB/Eurosystem of which the Central Bank of Malta forms part.

Malta’s reputation as a place where the law functions, where one is considered innocent until proven guilty and where the institutions meant to be autonomous are truly autonomous and can withstand pressure, whether from the government or the Opposition, will be brought into question if I resign at this stage.

In fact, I would prefer that, having abandoned the objective of acceding to the governorship, I did what 65-year-olds normally do and went into retirement after 47-plus years of uninterrupted economic activity. I may well do that but only after my name has been cleared through the legal process.

Then it will be my decision, and not a resignation caused by external pressure.

Alfred Mifsud is deputy governor of the Central Bank of Malta.