Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1147486
10 OPINION maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 24 JULY 2019 THE scenes that unfolded out- side the PN headquarters last Tuesday were certainly nothing new, to anyone who has worked in the local media at any point in the last 25 years. For a lot longer than that, it has been an open secret that both the larger parties are home to a variety of home- grown thugs and troublemak- ers: all permanently hover- ing around their leader like a swarm of angry, buzzing hor- nets; and threatening to 'sting' anyone who poses any form of 'threat' to the source of all their power and influence. Like many other open secrets, this is one we all seem to have simply accepted as an unavoid- able facet of Maltese politics. Watching that clip again, I was reminded of literally dozens of other analogous incidents I have witnessed (sometimes directed at myself) over the past two decades… occasion- ally (but never in my own case) spilling over into actual vio- lence: a photographer's camera broken here, a journalist man- handled or injured there… all in the name of 'party loyalty'. In times of political tension – which is to say, every couple of years or so - you can almost set your watch by the regular- ity with which some partisan hothead or other will step out of the shadows, and bully or harass a journalist for trying to take a photo, or daring to ask their party leader an awkward or difficult question. Most often, however, they don't even need to resort to (or threaten) violence. Their mere presence alone, coupled with their menacing scowls… and in at least one case in which I was involved, their sarcas- tic grins… is all it might take to remind the press who's re- ally in charge at those political events. Make no mistake, it is an ugly spectacle to behold. And it has also been a mainstay of local politics, on both sides of the divide, ever since I can re- member. I don't think I need to ex- plain why, either. My memory stretches back, at very most, to the late 1970s: which was prob- ably the heyday of a culture of thuggery that had already ex- isted for decades. So notori- ous was that era, in fact, that looked back upon it really does start to resemble the mythical 'Old West': a history punctu- ated by the names (and nick- names) of famous 'outlaws' – Ic-Caqwes, It-Toto, Il-Qattus, Il-Qahbu, Zeppi il-Hafi, etc. – who all somehow left their mark in a decades-old, and of- ten deadly, feud between rival clans. But at least, back then there were clear and pressing reasons to explain their role within the broader historical tableau. Like the Old West, the Maltese political landscape was still a hostile, dangerous wilderness that needed 'taming'. If politi- cians felt the need to surround themselves with bodyguards… it was because they - and their families, supporters, etc. - very often really did need protec- tion from the army of thugs on the other side. What's their excuse today, I wonder? Do people like Adri- an Delia feel so threatened by a young woman filming with her mobile phone, that they con- done the continued existence of henchmen and hoodlums to prevent it from actually hap- pening? For that is also what emerged from that clip and its after- math. So far, it has elicited complaints from the Press Club and various NGOs – in- cluding (here's the rub) the ones that are openly inimical to Delia – but I have not heard a word of condemnation from the Nationalist Party itself. It doesn't even surprise me all that much, because… well, there was no real public reac- tion, either. We are all so in- ured to this sort of thing that it doesn't even feel all that 'wrong'. And there are, in fact, several known scenarios where the presence of this criminal underbelly of politics is not only accepted, but almost ex- pected. For instance: nobody bats an eyelid when, at a mass-meet- ing, a party leader is carried shoulder-high to the podium, by what can only be described as a small private army of de- lirious political guerillas... Until recently, it was even considered perfectly normal for a thug from either side (cunningly disguised as a 'par- ty official') to accompany the police when delivering voting documents before an election. Or for small groups of party vigilantes to congregate out- side polling stations on voting day: ostensibly to 'offer protec- tion' in case of trouble… but very often causing all the trou- ble themselves. So it hardly surprises anyone at all to see a man menacingly trying to stop a journalist from filming PN councillors as they emerged from last Tuesday's Executive Council meeting: even though it is journalists, and not thugs, who have any business at all to even be pre- sent for such events... let alone to call all the shots. It is, after all, the journal- ist's job to inform the general public of the state of affairs in Malta's largest Opposition party. Which raises an inevita- ble question: what was the job of the man trying to block that camera with his hand, anyway? What is his role, if any, within the PN's structures, to even justify his presence at the party headquarters at all? I won't bother answering that, because we all both know and accept the score. Thirty years ago, it might have been to take the (proverbial, but also pos- sibly real, and most likely rub- ber) 'bullet' on behalf of their leader. Today, it can only be to preserve a status quo from which such people are clearly benefitting, though they them- selves serve no other real pur- pose in the greater scheme of things. Does the PN (or Labour, for that matter) need to surround itself with strongarm tough- guys, in today's political cli- mate? Clearly, the answer is no. But invert the question and a different picture emerges. Do the tough-guys need their party leaders to remain in place for as long as possible? Evidently, yes, they do. Even for the simple reason that their attachment to one leader – in this case, Adrian Delia – would suddenly become meaningless, if Delia was no longer the lead- er of any party at all. So yes: there may admit- tedly be nothing more than fierce party loyalty, for its own sake, at work in this particular case… but we all know from past experience that some of these people may indeed one day expect a return on their 'investment'. They may, for instance, pre- sume that their years of loyal service on the frontlines would be rewarded when 'their' side is in power: public sector jobs, possibly as watchmen or 'se- curity'; guaranteed develop- ment permits, on demand; the odd concession for a kiosk or a beachclub here and there; all the way up to instant Presiden- tial pardons, for anything from drug-trafficking to armed rob- bery… It would be futile to deny there is a whole history of this sort of thing, on either side of the warzone. And if we contin- ue to accept that political par- ties surround themselves with criminals, like it's the most natural thing in the world… well, it is only natural that the outcome would be nothing less than criminal, too. But even if it were just a case of overzealous fandom… a 'De- lia-sal-mewt' sort of mentality, which also undeniably exists on both sides… it doesn't make it any less unacceptable, does it? So much so, that this sort of behaviour would not be toler- ated (not, at least, so openly and undisguised) in many other European countries. I'd like to see the reaction if the German equivalent of our 'Al- pha-male party hoodlum' tried to stop a journalist from film- ing Angela Merkel on her way out of a party conference like that… especially when other journalists at the same event are left free and unmolested to take as many photos, and ask as many questions, as they like. It would be headline news all over Europe, quite frankly. Nowhere more so than in Ger- many itself, where the incident would also stir up uncom- fortable memories of the me- dia subjugation under Hitler and Goebbels throughout the 1930s. But even anywhere else in the democratic world, that behav- iour would be compared to the pre-Fourth Estate era: when political parties were expected to deploy armies of thugs to suppress dissenting opinions; and the press itself was per- ceived to exist only as an of- ficial mouthpiece for political propaganda. Here in Malta, on the other hand, it seems to still be busi- ness as usual. And I, for one, would like to know why. I suppose the lazy way to de- scribe this culture would be as an 'inevitable consequence of our inherent tendency towards tribalism'. We accept these things, in the same way as we expect fights to break out be- tween rival band-clubs at the local village festa, or at a foot- ball match, etc. But that, to me, is simply ac- cepting the cause with as much resignation as the effect. It doesn't answer the all-impor- tant question: why do we have this 'tendency towards tribal- ism' in the first place? Even then, it doesn't address the underlying tendency to- wards violence. Since when does rivalry have to manifest itself only in terms of open ag- gression, anyway? Why didn't the same political antago- nism not produce a culture of healthy debate, instead of un- healthy intimidation? I can't give complete answers to either question, but - given the unacceptable fact that this culture still clearly thrives, around three decades after the forces that gave rise to it fizzled out – I think it's some- thing that our best brains are going to have to try and work out, if we are ever going to evolve out of this Paleolithic phase that Maltese politics is evidently still stuck in. And the answers are going to have to come from the two parties themselves. Gone are the days when they could point towards real threats to life and limb to justify surrounding themselves with hoodlums. In today's climate, they're going to have to come up with other reason, to explain why journal- ists are still openly bullied and harassed on their own door- steps, by people who are clear- ly motivated by attachment to their own party. Well, I'm not hearing any ex- planation for this utterly unac- ceptable situation right now. Are you? Raphael Vassallo Time for parties to rein in their thugs Does the PN (or Labour, for that matter) need to surround itself with strongarm tough-guys, in today's political climate?