No-divorce lobby accused of ‘mischaracterising marriage’

It was perhaps one of the most animated debates in the run-up to the 28 May referendum on divorce.

The two camps in the divorce debate faced a crowd of some 80 university students at the quadrangle at Tal-Qroqq, thrashing out vital aspects of the divorce bill and in the process, offered some comic relief in the put-downs traded between both sides.

“Zwieg Bla Divorzju are trying to make us believe that men wake up in the morning to see their wife has gone beyond a size 10, and decide to divorce them,” former Nationalist MP Michael Falzon said, to the laughter of the audience, referring to the claim by Anna Vella, the president of the Church’s Cana Movement.

“This is a frivolous mischaracterisation of marriage. They insult our sense of marriage, portray man as cats on heat who leave women when they grow fat.”

A contentious exchange developed between Dr Austin Bencini of Zwieg Bla Divorzju, and Dr Deborah Schembri, the chairperson of Moviment Iva, over claims that spouses could divorce instantly after four years of marriage.

In their brief introductions, Bencini said Malta’s social conditions shows the country was not ready for a radical reform of its marriage law. Schembri said she felt nobody had any right to impose their beliefs on people who had justifiable recourse to divorce.

Attacking the concept of a ‘no fault’ divorce, Bencini said spouses in all marriages of four years would be eligible to apply for a divorce. “On the contrary, to separate a spouse must present the courts with specific reasons that prove a fault on the part of the other spouse… the divorce bill doesn’t require spouses to prove any fault.”

He was instantly contradicted by Deborah Schembri, who said civil law allowed for separations in marriages where there is fault, but also ‘no fault’ grounds were marriages have ‘broken down irremediably’. The latter involves an agreement by both spouses to agree to separate, without making any claim for alimony which can only be granted on a fault ground.

“The divorce bill we have proposed obliges couples who have either been separated for four years or living apart, to go through both separation proceedings and then divorce. This means that, unless the couple has already separated, one spouse can commence separation proceedings on the basis of a fault and claim alimony. And that alimony will still be payable upon divorce,” Schembri said.

Bencini, now being taken to task by Schembri "for not having understood the law properly", insisted that lawyers would push their clients to seek a divorce right away without having to enter into separation proceedings, to evade any form of liability for alimony.

But Schembri retorted that fault-based grounds for separation would still be valid for spouses seeking divorce, because they would have to secure a separation decree before filing for divorce.

“Bencini cannot deny that the divorce law forbids spouses from superseding the separation stage,” Michael Falzon added.

Architect David Zahra, speaking for Zwieg Bla Divorzju, pushed the line that in countries where there was divorce, marital breakdown had increased. “It provides an opt-out clause that encourages people to leave their marriage without any chance for reconciliation. And it will spread to our children.”

Schembri rebutted with a claim that Italy was experiencing less marital breakdown despite having a divorce law. To this, Bencini said Italy also had a declining marriage rate.

“The so called ‘divorce mentality’ already exists in Malta today with the rate of marriage separations. The lack of a divorce bill is no deterrent to marital breakdown,” Schembri said.

Bencini also claimed that remarriage would not guarantee that spouses will be able to maintain a family, while paying alimony to a divorced spouse. Zahra argued that the issue was a matter of economic impact. “How can people on minimum wage afford maintenance for former spouses?”

Deborah Schembri reminded the audience that civil and church annulments cancelled out each spouse’s obligations towards each other, such as alimony.

In an intervention from the floor, Alternattiva Demokratika spokesperson for international affairs Profs. Arnold Cassola challenged Zwieg Bla Divorzju to prove how divorced or remarried spouses could not afford paying maintenance for children from their first marriages.

“Spouses who are separated or who had marriages annulled are already paying maintenance for their children and creating new families.”