[WATCH] Naomi Cachia: ‘Legislators cannot ignore abortion reality’

Malta’s strict anti-abortion law was changed last year to include an exception if the woman’s life is in danger.

The change was significant because it was the first time in more than 100 years that the law criminalising abortion was amended. However, the final version of the amendment was different from the government’s original proposal to also include an exception if the woman’s health was at risk.

But while anti-abortion activists claimed victory, pro-choice activists were left hugely disappointed.

Now, freshly-appointed government Whip Naomi Cachia says the legal change approved by parliament last year should not spell the end of the discussion on abortion.

She avoids giving me a direct answer when I ask her whether the time has come for abortion to be legalised. But Cachia does insist abortion is a reality that legislators should not ignore.

“There are a lot of things that we have to discuss because it hurts me to see the State abandon women at a sensitive moment when they order abortion pills online and self-administer… as legislators we have the responsibility to continue speaking on subjects that are uncomfortable and sensitive,” she tells me.

Cachia is the first woman to occupy the role of Whip in parliament’s history. She feels this appointment should not be underestimated in the aftermath of a national debate to encourage more female participation in politics.

But the young MP is under no illusion as to the long road ahead to change mentalities and perceptions. The political scene is still too dominated by men, she tells me.

“With more women in parliament, even the style of doing politics will change… the role of Whip is often associated with someone who can intimidate others and for sure that is not a characteristic anyone can attribute to me,” she says.

The following is an excerpt from the interview.

You are the first female Whip in Malta’s parliament. In a country where female representation in politics is still a struggle, do you feel your appointment is a significant step?

I am honoured to be the first woman to be doing this job in the history of Malta’s parliament and it is a significant development that we should not underestimate in the context of the debate that has been going on over these past few years to encourage more women to participate in politics. We know what the obstacles are and how we worked to increase the number of female MPs in the last election… now is the time to start seeing the result of that exercise and my appointment as government Whip is one such development that may not have been possible had we not had the numbers in parliament. Later on, I would like to see more contributions by women in parliament, something we have started to see at committee level. These are positive developments but if we were to look at the tangible results, this moment is significant.

Do you feel the political environment is still too male dominated?

Yes, it is and it will remain so until we have more women who choose to join public life. With more women in parliament, even the style of doing politics will change… the role of Whip is often associated with someone who can intimidate others and for sure that is not a characteristic anyone can attribute to me. The manner by which we do politics and look at things will change but it takes time… government opted for shock therapy [by introducing the gender corrective mechanism for elections] but I think it is still too early to see the results of this change.

Government had published a Bill that sought to change Malta’s strict anti-abortion law by proposing to allow pregnancy termination if a woman’s life and health are in danger. Yet, the final law approved by parliament, following changes proposed by the government to its own Bill, left pro-choice activists disappointed because the health aspect was given secondary importance. Do you understand the disappointment of pro-choice activists?

If I were to speak, not as a parliamentarian but as a Maltese woman who has lived all her life in Malta, the point of departure was a situation where no one used to talk about abortion… the steps we witnessed over the past months and years, including the fact that abortion was discussed at legislative level, were significant… I understand there were people who wanted us to go further; but there were also many others who believed we went too far and we should not have legislated on the matter. I respectfully do not agree with the latter because we had situations that had to be addressed. If anything, legislative changes came too late for some…

Is it time for abortion to be introduced?

The momentum for a mature discussion on the subject that has built up over the past months should not be lost… my wish is to continue discussing this subject for as long as it takes in a mature way; whether we manage to do so depends on the manner by which the political parties and MPs tackle the subject… there are a lot of things that we have to discuss because it hurts me to see the State abandon women at a sensitive moment when they order abortion pills online and self-administer… abortion is a reality people may not want to acknowledge but as legislators we have the responsibility to continue speaking on subjects that are uncomfortable and sensitive.

Do you believe that the Prime Minister’s recent reach-out to MPs who were implicated in wrongdoing of sorts such as Justyne Caruana and Rosianne Cutajar is sending out the wrong message? It is as if he is saying, ‘if you do wrong, you’ll get your small punishment but don’t worry we will find a way to fix things’.

The Prime Minister asked a very legitimate question, which should prompt a wider discussion. When someone has paid a price for their actions, should the individual keep shouldering the burden for the rest of their life? If they did a mistake and resigned, should that end their political career forever? It obviously depends on what the mistake was but it is a pertinent question. This does not imply putting aside political responsibility that has historically always taken a back seat. It is important that we are conscious of the fact that as MPs our political and private lives are under scrutiny and there is a price to pay for this but the question the Prime Minister asked is valid and everyone should think about it.

But these individuals’ mistakes were big, so much so they attracted the Prime Minister’s ire when they happened. Shouldn’t they continue to shoulder the price for their mistakes? Why should they be reinstated in positions where they performed their mistakes?

If you make a mistake that warrants the end of your political career, I have no problem with this reasoning; I believe it is the right thing to do. But we cannot put everyone in the same basket either.