In four days’ time, Malta will have a new prime minister. Whoever is elected will face the daunting challenges of a nation in acute crisis. It will be an extremely bumpy transition to power. His first task will be to re-establish some vestiges of normality and stability. Confidence building will be essential to success.
His “action plan” on arrival in Castille must focus on three key areas. First, he must demonstrate his determination to 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. Second, he must eradicate traces of corruption and maladministration and introduce greater transparency and accountability. Third, he must restore Malta’s battered international reputation.
To ensure delivery of these objectives, he should nominate a minister to oversee progress reporting directly to him.
But he must tackle these Herculean tasks with a clear understanding of the limitations that confront any leader of this country. Malta is remarkable for being the smallest, democratic, independent country in the European Union. It boasts the full panoply of a ‘First World’ major state: armed forces, diplomatic missions in 42 countries and multilateral organisations, advanced and thriving public services, a remarkably successful free market economy.
But its demographic, educational, political and cultural limitations are huge. These limit severely what the state can achieve. Toxic political polarisation is endemic and self-defeating.
The small size of the population and an educational system that prizes passing exams over critical thinking, coupled with a private sector that draws the best graduates, inevitably restricts the quality of those entering politics and manning the public services. These are the limiting, uniquely Maltese factors which constrain any new prime minister.
Starting with constitutional and institutional reform, he must tackle head-on the issue which has brought Malta’s governance to this sorry pass: the lack of adequate checks and balances on the powers of his own office. He must give the Convention on the Constitution under the President the human and other resources needed to report within three months with recommendations for urgent constitutional changes on this overriding issue.
Other amendments to the constitution (the powers of the president, revision of electoral law, the role of parliament, financing of political parties and others) can follow in due course. Indeed, their constitutional shape and form will stem logically from decisions made on the checks and balances affecting the office of the prime minister.
Institutional reform lies within the new prime minister’s gift. The major institutions are weak. They are deficient because their leadership is too beholden to the office of the prime minister. He must demonstrate that clear distance will be placed between him and the institutions. Indeed, any consideration of checks and balances must factor in the prime minister’s reduced role in their selection.
A new prime minister will have to exercise probably the most demanding challenges of moral leadership in Malta’s chequered half century of post-Independence history
As to the quality of institutional leadership, there is a strong argument for opening up the post of Commissioner of Police to top foreign professionals to restore confidence and knock the Malta Police Force into shape.
For reasons primarily reflecting Malta’s size and culture of nepotism and cronyism, it would appear wise to offer the posts of heads of the Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) and the Financial Investigation Administration Unit (FIAU) to foreign leadership incumbents as well.
As a demonstration of intent and to stamp his mark on the new way of doing business, the new prime minister should take immediate legislative steps to introduce the Venice Commission’s recommendations on the judiciary.
He must also instruct that all pending reports by the Ombudsman, the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life and the National Audit Office are brought before parliament for debate and possible implementation. And he should also immediately replace all backbench members of Parliament who (wrongly) hold executive positions in government.
As to the second key area – eradicating all traces of corruption and maladministration and introducing greater transparency and accountability in government – it is probably these issues that will make or break the new prime minister’s administration rather than the esoteric niceties of the constitution, important though they are.
He must immediately announce the establishment of “A People’s Forum on Corruption and the Rule of Law” with the task of reporting its findings within six months.
The People’s Forum should be led by a core of not more than 15 members – comprising trusted civil society representatives and a broad-based cross-section of legal, constitutional and academic experts – in consultation with a representative forum of 40 “ordinary” members of the public picked at random.
The Forum’s task will be to distil the outcome of the public consultation, produce an assessment of the state of the rule of law and perceptions of corruption today and focus on the recommendations needed to cut the cancer of corruption and maladministration from our system of governance.
In parallel, the new prime minister must resolve that his government will distance itself from the corrupting influence of big business by “working with business but not led by business”. Moreover, he must accelerate steps by the Planning Authority to reduce the rate of construction development and introduce ironclad conditions to safeguard ODZ from further encroachment.
As demonstration of his intent to eradicate maladministration and to provide greater transparency, he should immediately declare that the much-abused system of “positions of trust” will be ended as soon as possible.
The current discredited system should be replaced by the appointment of “special political advisers” numbering not more than 30 throughout government. The Public Service Commission’s authority in this field must be re-established, ensuring that meritocracy in the public service is restored, subject to clear and unambiguous rules on transparency and accountability.
He should also resolve publicly that his administration will invariably honour all reasonable freedom of information requests rather than block them.
Thirdly, as to the restoration of Malta’s battered international reputation, the new prime minister will be judged on his actions. Provided he delivers on the policies set out above, Malta will have a good product to sell backed up by a professionally-led, well-targeted international diplomatic and lobbying drive to restore its tarnished reputation.
If Malta is to come through this crisis, the new prime minister must take the bold actions needed to address the long-standing constitutional, institutional and administrative challenges which the last turbulent month has exposed. Redemption will not be achieved until these actions are taken.
Within the next few days, a new prime minister will have to exercise probably the most demanding challenges of moral leadership in Malta’s chequered half century of post-Independence history. All people of goodwill wish him well in meeting them.