Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/785757
25 maltatoday, SUNDAY, 12 FEBRUARY 2017 Opinion self-appointed 'right' to simply publish the first unsubstantiated rumour to reach their ears, without doing a jot of journalistic work to verify it. To be honest, it is preposterous to expect any journalist to do so... still less for the entire body of Maltese journalism to be 'called to arms' in what is ultimately a private and ultra-personal battle against the Labour government, declared by someone with glaring vested interests. Not to mention the implications for journalism itself. To defend that blog-entry is subliminally also to justify the future publication of any number of equally unsubstantiated allegations about anyone at all. Who knows? It could be you. Who's to say some private enemy of yours won't one day pass on a baseless accusation that you are a child-molester or serial rapist, and that some eager-beaver 'journalist' won't just print that claim as 'fact', in a blog 'believed' by thousands of devotees? What will protect your reputation then? No, sorry, but that is not a road I want to see Maltese journalism go down. It is, of course, too late to stop it now. My gut feeling tells me many will soon rue the day when they thought this sort of thing was actually worth defending. But of course, there is a converse to this too. I can fully understand Cardona's desire to hit out with everything the law places at his disposal. Legally speaking, he has a right to do so. BUT (and it's a very big BUT that a lot of people here seem just don't seem to ever get)... a purely legal right does not automatically extend to an ethical justification for any given action. In the case of the garnishee order, it can be interpreted the clean other way round. Cardona has a right to use it, but to do so would be a clear-cut case of abuse of power. Shakespeare puts it better than I can, in (appropriately enough) 'Measure for Measure': 'It is excellent to have a giant's strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant'. What makes it 'tyrannous' is partly that a garnishee order, in this scenario, violates the principle of innocence until proven guilty. The trial has not yet begun, still less reached a guilty verdict. Regardless what you make of the defendant's case, to 'punish' someone who has yet to be judged can only be described as a perversion of the natural course of justice. (Note: This is doubly true when you also consider that the purpose of a garnishee order is not that at all: it is mostly to prevent assets from being liquidated before they can be used to settle existing debts – emphasis on 'existing'.) And there: you have both sides of the dilemma. Not an easy one to resolve, either. Chris Cardona is still in time to reverse his hasty decision, but to expect him to do so is also to overlook the very grievous nature of the injury inf licted. He can 'do the right thing' and withdraw the sequestration (or whatever the correct term is)... but he may also reason that the maximum 11,000 euros he stands to win would be poor compensation, especially given that the case will almost certainly drag on until after the next election. Another thing I can't understand is: why is all the pressure 'to do the right thing' heaped only on Cardona – the injured party in this case, as far as I can see – and none at all on the person who published inf lammatory accusations without proof? More to the point: why are journalists being encouraged – nay, pressured – to lend support to the one side in this argument that is clearly more at fault? Please note, incidentally, that those questions will remain standing even in the event that the allegations are proven true at some point in the future. I am talking about the decision to publish here, not the allegations themselves. At the point when that decision was taken, there was no evidence or even substantiation, beyond a single, uncorroborated eyewitness account. How or why any journalist is even supposed to defend that is quite frankly beyond me. Simply put: this is not a blanket 'one side is right' scenario. I for one will certainly not support anyone's right to simply blurt out whatever comes into their head at any given moment, and to hell with the consequences. The very idea that I am expected to is completely and utterly absurd. But nor can I realistically condone the use of a tactic that was once threatened, with dire effect, against MaltaToday over my own articles. Ultimately, however, removing the garnishee order – even in its totality – will not even begin to address the Pandora's Box that this case has f lung wide open. Seeing is believing, and something tells me the effects of our national journalistic nosedive will be visible to everyone before the year is up. Call for Expressions of Interest The Malta Council for Science and Technology is hereby issuing a Call for Expressions of Interest for the rental of premises located adjacent to the Esplora Interactive Science Centre. Offers of a minimum of €60,000 annual ground rent will be shortlisted for consideration. The grounds consists of 175m 2 internal space and approximately 300m 2 outdoor areas, at promenade level, with unobstructed views of Fort St. Angelo, the Esplora Cot Lift and Il-Kalkara Marina. Interested parties are invited to submit their proposed business plan by not later than Friday 3rd March 2017 at roderick.marmara@gov.mt, and to contact the Malta Council for Science and Technology Agency on the same email address in order to organise a site visit, during which more detailed information will also be provided. The Malta Council For Science And Technology, Villa Bighi, Il-Kalkara KKR 1320, Malta www.mcst.gov.mt