Article 59 of Chapter VI of the Constitution of Malta, which deals with the Speaker and Deputy Speaker, does not mention anything about what the person’s ethical role is to be. Nor do the Standing Orders. However, the parliamentary bible written by Erskine May, UK former clerk of the House of Commons, states the following about the role of the speaker of the House:

“The chief characteristics attaching to the Office of Speaker in the House of Commons are authority and impartiality”. It then goes on to state: “Confidence in the impartiality of the Speaker is an indispensable condition of the successful working of procedure, and many conventions exist which have as their object not only to ensure the impartiality of the Speaker but also to ensure that that impartiality is generally recognised.”

The dictionary qualification of “impartiality” is “equal treatment of all rivals and disputants” and its main quality is fairness. This latter term is actually part of legal terminology, and is defined as “balance that is essential to due process”.

Confidence in the Speaker’s impartiality is not a given. The Speaker has to show in both words and deeds that s/he can be balanced and fair, regardless of his/her own political beliefs and ideology. For a Speaker worthy of the name, black is black and white is white, and any shade of grey has to be laid out against the ethical principles of honesty, fairness and equality. As in the case of the President of the Republic, once a person is made Speaker of the house, s/he has to forget former party loyalties, because s/he is now representing the interests of the country as a whole, and not of the party s/he once belonged to or its partisans.  Persons occupying these two offices are ethically bound to exercise moral principles in their behaviour and in the way they conduct their business.

Ethical behaviour should in fact be practised by every citizen, and ideally, our parliamentarians, who represent us, should, be shining examples of moral behaviour. The Speaker, by his/her very office, is duty-bound to lead by example, and ensure that every citizen will acknowledge his/her fair and balanced position with regard to any matter that appears before him/her. 

Rosianne Cutajar, a sitting member of parliament, made a deal with businessman Yorgen Fenech, of which she did not inform Parliament, as she was legally obliged to do. She earned €46,500 from this deal, and was given another €9000 for her birthday. Let’s put this into perspective. This is roughly equivalent to about two years salary of a teacher, and three years salary of an average blue-collar worker.

On November 8, Rosianne Cutajar’s behaviour was defined as unethical by representatives of both sides of the House who formed part of the Standards Committee. In situations like this, anyone in a position of responsibility would auto-suspend themselves until due process is carried out. Cutajar chose to remain in parliament, and the Standards Committee decided to let her off the hook with a simple, harsh ‘telling-off’. To give a parallel example, if a teacher is accused of alleged professional misconduct, s/he may be suspended on half-pay, and if found guilty may even be dismissed.

Given the scenario above, and the responsibilities of both the parliamentarian and the speaker, one would have expected that this whole issue should not have had to go to the Standards Committee. Anġlu Farrugia should have the authority to suspend anyone in Parliament. The Speaker should have used the means at his disposal to ensure that the institution that he is responsible for is not made a mockery of.

Not only did the Speaker not take the action expected of his office, but he did not even carry out the instructions given to him by the Standards Committee. Rosianne Cutajar did not receive the deserved ‘stern reprimand’ that Anglu Farrugia had undertaken to write. She was simply informed of it. What is certain is that the Speaker did not show fairness and equality; he did not act supra partes as his office requires of him.

In a parliamentary system such as ours, there are different layers of security which are put in place to safeguard our democracy. The role of the Speaker is one of the most important in this respect. By refusing to play his part in safeguarding the rule of law and upholding the institution he represents, the Speaker has made a mockery not only of himself but also of our parliamentary democracy. That is why I shall be in front of Parliament protesting at 6 pm today.

Vicki Ann Cremona is a former president of civil society group Repubblika.