Malta needs a truth commission

The effect of the current situation in Malta on the national psyche is a worrying state of affairs.

A recent interesting article by Nigel Camilleri, president of the Maltese Association of Psychiatry (‘Re-establish normality now’ – Times of Malta December 6) insists that his association urges giving priority to the safeguarding of the health of the nation by putting a stop to moral injury. Moral injury, he explained, results when a person experiences a sense of betrayal, humiliation, frustration, anger and shame as a result of people of trust failing to do the right thing.

In short, Camilleri expressed the opinion that the current political crisis is negatively affecting the overall mental and emotional well-being of our country and a return to normality is a ‘sine qua non’.

The citizens of this small but proud country are facing the biggest moral crisis since becoming independent. What are we going to do about it?

After the transition from apartheid in South Africa, President Nelson Mandela set up a ‘Truth and Reconciliation Commission’ under the leadership of former Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu to study the effects of apartheid in that country.

I feel that in the current circumstances, Malta needs a truth commission. A truth commission – or truth and reconciliation commission – is normally tasked with discovering and revealing past wrongdoing by a government and non-state actors, in the hope of resolving conflicts left over from the past. Although Mandela’s idea was criticised by many and some objectives were not achieved, the process succeeded in its most fundamental responsibility: it pulled South Africa safely into a modern, democratic era.

For the average citizens, it matters little whether or not such an investigation is formally called a truth commission but the term has intuitive appeal: it generates expectations that sordid deals will be brought to light and official lies exposed.

Whether investigating human rights violations, corruption, the manipulation of information or any other events about which details are murky, the ‘truth’ is a welcome antidote.

Although, the depiction of the nation as a diseased and wounded body that can be cleansed and healed through ‘talk therapy’ is questioned by some, I think the advantages of such a process would undoubtedly benefit Malta.

Truth commissions are not bodies that, on their own, can achieve such lofty goals as truth, justice and reconciliation, but are simply processes that can make a contribution to longer political efforts having these same aims.

In the case of the current Maltese situation, the people’s desire to see their country return to becoming ‘normal’ is palpable. The greatest mistake Joseph Muscat’s successor can make is just pushing for an end to the judicial processes, which are meant to punish those found guilty of breaking the law, while sweeping everything else under the carpet. This will not ensure Malta’s return to normalcy. It would not heal the nation’s wounds but help to keep them festering.

We have to see why what happened was possible and undertake the reforms necessary to avoid repetition of abuses. Even so, as I always maintain, there are no laws or Constitutional clauses that can stop persons from acting in bad faith and that is why democracy needs the Opposition’s and the media’s input – even at the risk of abuses. After all, polticians, media people and those active in non-governmental organisations are subject to the human foibles.

The role of the two main political parties in a Truth Commission for Malta should be kept to a minimum, while the independent media and civil society should be given more space. In Malta’s incestuous society, most people are pejudiced one way or another; but I have no doubt that there are people who can be objective, irrespective of their political leanings or sympathies.

To recover and become ‘normal’, the Maltese people must forgo their tribal political loyalties and face the truth – however obnoxious it may be.

We have to bite the bullet, if we want this small but proud nation to rise again.

The right decision

The decision taken by the Leader of the Opposition, Adrian Delia, to publish the Egrant inquiry report was the right one.

In April 2017, Daphne Caruana Galizia had alleged that the company was owned by the Prime Minister’s wife Michelle, prompting Joseph Muscat to request a magisterial inquiry into that claim.

Delia was reported saying that he had the option of not publishing anything or of publishing only parts of it.  He finally chose the option of publishing the document in its entirety.

The official line, endorsed by the Attorney General, was that this publication would hinder the police in their pursuit of investigations requested by the inquiring magistrate. This line was repeated in the editorial of the GWU daily l-orizzont last Thursday.

In truth, the police had ample time to pursue the investigations indicated by the magistrate and therefore this could have only been a lame excuse to cover up the inadequacies of our institutions.