Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1445886
8 NEWS maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 26 JANUARY 2022 Abela's logic: When fighting the mafia turns you in to a 'mafia state'vote LAST Sunday, Prime Minister Robert Abela claimed the Nation- alist Party is proposing legislative amendment "purportedly" aimed at fighting corruption, as a veiled attempt at "recognising Malta as a mafia state". "I have read the bills and I will be the first to debate on Thursday. The Opposition did not manage to paralyse the economy during a pandemic and it will not manage now," he warned supporters in Nadur. In a reference to one of the Bills outlawing ministers from using private communications on gov- ernment duties, Abela spoke of businessmen who could depend on a direct link with the prime minister. Warning the law would send politicians to jail if found di- rectly communicating with busi- nessmen, Abela urged businesses to continue communicating with him, pledging he will always de- fend them. "We will not allow institutions to terrorise anyone. What we want is, reason," he said. But by turning down the Oppo- sition's proposals, what message is Abela sending? Abela suggests countries that enacted similar laws against or- ganised crime were still dubbed 'mafia states' – but they did so for exactly opposite reasons: clamping down on organised crime to safeguard their reputa- tion as states who actively fight corruption and organised crime It is countries which do not fight organised crime and lack the laws to do so which generally get la- belled as mafia states. A few months ago it was the Montenegrin government which dubbed a proposed law facilitating the confiscation of assets of illegal origin, an "anti-mafia law". And the reputational damage to Malta has already been caused by the impunity and institutional paralysis in the aftermath of the Panama Papers. Only one of the 12 laws proposed by the PN tar- gets mafia-like association, mod- elled on Italy's historic anti-mafia laws which helped in turning the tide against organised crime after an explosion of mafia-related vio- lence. In 1982, the Italian parliament passed Article 416-bis, which de- fined for the first time the crime of "mafia-type association". In recog- nition of the importance of politi- cal alliances for mafia crimes, the procurement of votes is explicitly mentioned in the law as a possible mafia activity. The law proposed by the PN follows the specific Italian model in criminalising membership in mafia-like organi- sations marked by secrecy and in- timidation, even in the absence of proof in other criminal acts. It is arguable whether one can compare the insidious territori- al presence of the Sicilian Mafia and Neapolitan Camorra in Italy, where local bosses run a paral- lel economy based on patronage, to the ad hoc conspiracy to kill Daphne Caruana Galizia. One may address this deficiency by us- ing a different terminology while criminalising membership in or- ganisations marked by secrecy and intimidation. But the assassination of Carua- na Galizia did expose the dangers of collusion between criminals and business people with strong political connections. Moreover, Malta's close proximity to Italy and the infiltration of mafia mon- ey in legitimate businesses like gaming, coupled with the use of Malta-based banks by PEPs from countries mired by corruption like Azerbaijan, further underlines Malta's vulnerability. Countries like the France, the UK and Ireland have also enacted strong legislation against the pro- ceeds from organised crime, in the shape of unexplained wealth or- ders, another measure proposed by the PN. Using Abela's logic one would argue that by introducing such laws these countries were also inflicting reputational damage on themselves by recognising the dangers of mafia infiltration in their legitimate economy. But by taking action, they made it harder for organised crime to do so. Law-abiding businesses have nothing to fear if their dealings with politicians are logged in official communication. But it would go a long way in protecting them from the unfair dealings of rivals who have no such qualms in their bid to se- cure contracts and permits from politicians The law proposed by the PN will only criminalise the use of per- sonal email and other electronic messaging systems for the pursuit of monetary advantage or profit or in a way, which results in financial losses for the country. Public officials will still be able to use their Gmail or WhatsApp account to talk to anyone else, in- cluding businessmen, on all other matters. In fact, one can argue that a draft code of ethics proposed by Standards Commissioner George Hyzler is wider in scope by oblig- ing politicians to log any meetings with lobbyists in a transparency registry. And curiously it was Environ- ment and Planning Minister Aar- on Farrugia who unilaterally had introduced an electronic register to log the names and details of meetings held with individuals and organisations soon after tak- ing up his ministerial role in 2021; even if he later back-tracked, in- sisting that he is waiting for the outcome of a proposal being drafted by the Standards Com- missioner for a government-wide lobby register. What is at stake here is the un- due influence of businessmen with good political connections in 'selling' their projects to poli- ticians, well before these are ap- proved by regulatory authorities, something which is not possible for businessmen who are either more scrupulous or lack the same political clout. This inevitably results in unfairness, favouring well-connected business elites over those who are not. Banning the use of personal email and other personal electron- ic channels would not criminalise the over-familiarity between busi- nessmen and politicians of the kind exposed in leaks involving Edward Zammit Lewis and Yor- gen Fenech. But it would address concerns raised by the Auditor General on the use by then-Prime Minister Joseph Muscat of his personal email joseph@josephmuscat.com for government business in ne- gotiations resulting in the termi- nation of a 65-year lease to Café Premier against a €4.2 million compensation. Any proposal by the Nationalist Party made in the full knowledge that Labour's poll lead is unas- sailable, is bound to be seen as an attempt to clip Labour's wings and score electoral points. But Abela had every opportunity to enact such laws himself or to delegate such responsibility to a constituent assembly entrusted with the sole task of re-writing the rulebook in the wake of the historically unprecedented attack on the institutions by the criminal cabal, which killed Caruana Galizia In theory, the PN laws would clip the wings of any government It's not laws against collusion between state, organised crime and business that makes a country a 'mafia state' – but their absence, especially after the murder of a journalist and major revelations of corruption. What message does Robert Abela send by shooting down the PN's proposals? asks James Debono