Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1526771
11 EDITORIAL maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 18 SEPTEMBER 2024 CRIMINAL libel was abolished in 2018 by the La- bour government as part of a series of reforms that saw the Press Act make way for the new Media and Defamation Act. The removal of criminal libel was a victory for jour- nalism and freedom of expression. Indeed, Malta be- came one of only a handful of EU member states that no longer criminalised defamation; a trailblazer of sorts. The change came in the aftermath of Daphne Caru- ana Galizia's murder. But the shock of that horrible murder appears to be waning seven long years down the line. Criminal libel was often used by individuals and politicians to try and silence journalists and pre- vent them from exercising their right to freedom of expression. It served to create a chilling effect that sought to stymie debate. As far back as 2012, politi- cians such as Jose Herrera and Franco Debono had called for the removal of criminal libel, arguing that such proceedings should be of a civil nature. But now, six years after the Labour government took the bold step to remove criminal libel from the statute books, singular voices within the Labour Par- ty are toying with the idea of turning the clock back. Over the weekend, former Labour Party president Ramona Attard called for the return of criminal libel and higher penalties for libel cases. She was mimick- ing several calls made over the past month by for- mer Labour activist Neville Gafà, a close ally of Keith Schembri, on his blog. It is unclear whether Attard's outburst and Gafà's writings are part of a grassroots campaign pushed by the Labour Party to prepare the groundwork for a U-turn on criminal libel. The Labour government promised a White Pa- per last year with proposed reforms to strengthen freedom of expression and offer more protection to journalists. The White Paper should have had as its basis proposals for reform made by the Committee of Media Experts set up by the government in the wake of the Caruana Galizia public inquiry recom- mendations. However, the government has so far not lived up to its commitment and instead we are hearing voices from within it clamouring for a return to a past when criminal libel was used in a vexatious manner to try and silence journalists. Attard based her argument on personal experience when a blogger earlier this year, falsely accused her father of being a beneficiary of the disability bene- fits scandal involving former MP Silvio Grixti. The story was a complete lie from beginning to end, so much so that the blogger went on to remove the sto- ry when this was pointed out to him. In that circumstance, Attard and her father could have easily instituted libel proceedings under the ex- isting civil regime. There is no need for criminal libel to be part of the law for the former PL president to take meaningful action against the blogger. Freedom of expression does not mean journal- ists, or anyone else for that matter, can lie. Indeed, freedom of expression is not absolute – the right to say what you want stops the moment you lie or in- tentionally misrepresent or slander someone. The Media and Defamation Act provides the legal in- struments to whoever wants to seek redress in these circumstances. It is convenient for politicians to depict the me- dia and journalists as the bogeyman. More often than not no attempt is made to distinguish between acts of serious journalism and cheap commentary thus conveniently tarring the whole sector with one brush. The truth is that had it not been for investigative journalists the extent of the sleaze involved in the Vi- tals hospitals deal would not have been revealed; the Panama companies belonging to Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri would have never been discovered; the shenanigans involving 17 Black, Yorgen Fenech, Electrogas, the Montenegro windfarms, Enemalta and so much more would have remained hidden. Before politicians like Attard start throwing around retrograde ideas they should sit down and reflect on the importance the media has in a democratic soci- ety. And Attard has a very good starting point – the Labour Party's 2022 electoral manifesto. The manifesto had described the media as "the fourth pillar of democracy" and went on to pledge constitutional and legal changes that ensure "greater protection for journalists". This leader hopes the PL still believes in its own pledge and will push the government to fulfil it in the coming months. Let's hope there will be no turning back of the clock on criminal libel maltatoday MaltaToday, MediaToday Co. Ltd, Vjal ir-Rihan, San Gwann SGN 9016 MANAGING EDITOR: SAVIOUR BALZAN EXECUTIVE EDITOR: KURT SANSONE EDITOR: PAUL COCKS Tel: (356) 21 382741-3, 21 382745-6 Website: www.maltatoday.com.mt E-mail: dailynews@mediatoday.com.mt pride, of our nation's identity and of our nation's history. This coming 21 September should serve as a platform for reflection and progress, en- couraging us to reflect on our nation's journey, the challeng- es overcome, and the mile- stones achieved, underscoring the concept of unity in diver- sity. Simultaneously, it should prompt introspection on the areas that need improvement, fostering a sense of responsi- bility towards nation-building. Today, we find ourselves once again challenged to explore what it is to be Maltese and to reflect on how we celebrate our national life. One of the ways we seek to celebrate be- ing "us" is through the obser- vance of a single national day. Talk of constitutional reform is rife these days, and perhaps Independence Day could eas- ily be an obvious choice for a national day established by our Constitution. It would ac- knowledge a figurative "start- ing line", a sense of inclusion and boundedness that is vital to every nation's identity. This coming 21 September should serve as a platform for reflection and progress, encouraging us to reflect on our nation's journey, the challenges overcome, and the milestones achieved, underscoring the concept of unity in diversity