Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/806571
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 2 APRIL 2017 26 Letters The Maltese army has been drafted back into the USA's international military and education training (IMET) programme, after having its funds stopped four years ago because it refused to exempt US sol- diers from prosecution by the International Criminal Court. The ban was lifted back in October 2006, days after George W. Bush recommended to the Senate to ratify an extradition treaty with Malta, signed back in May. Last month, the US Congress's budget report on foreign spending for 2008 earmarked USD45,000 in IMET funds to Malta and another USD45,000 in Peace & Security funds, aimed at military moderni- zation. Malta was rendered ineligible for IMET funds, an important source of finance for training members of the armed forces, af- ter refusing to sign an Article 98 agreement that would bind Malta not to hand over US soldiers to the International Criminal Court, the world tribunal which prosecutes war criminals. Malta aligned itself with the EU in publicly refusing to sign the bilateral agreement. However, a 2004 joint report by the US defence and state departments claimed Malta felt "pressured not to sign" the agreement fearing it might endanger its EU candidacy. Despite being excluded from IMET funds, Malta was still a beneficiary of non- proliferation, antiterrorism and demining funds (NADR) in 2006. Last year, the US forwarded USD760,000 for training army corps in counter-terrorism and combating proliferation of weapons of mass destruc- tion (WMDs). In 2007 however, a request of USD425,000 for non-proliferation exer- cises under the NADR programme appears to have been withheld. The US defines Malta as an important partner in addressing Mediterranean secu- rity concerns, being as it is at the cross- roads of key transport lanes where nearly one-third of global maritime traffic passes by or through the island. US congressional reports claim the gov- ernment has been "responsive" to requests related to the war on terrorism, but that the US government is greatly concerned about the "potential movement" of WMDs through the Freeport. One of the reasons for this concern is the presence of the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL), which established the Freeport as its Mediterranean hub in 2004. Mark Pace, deputy chief of mission at Malta's embassy in Washington, was quoted by Government Security News back in September 2005 saying that it was better for the US government's war on terrorism if the Iranians "ship through a port that is being monitored". Earlier this year, Malta formally signed a shipboarding treaty which allows US marines to board Malta-registered vessels suspected of proliferation. The US has in- vested in Malta's border control with a rigid inflatable boat, known as an RIB, and a pa- trol boat as part of the export control and related border security (EXBS) programme. It also donated a container scanner for the Malta Freeport, and the controversial PISCES identification system, an immigra- tion database located at all ports of entry. News – 31 March 2007 Send your letters to: The Editor, MaltaToday, MediaToday Ltd. Vjal ir-Rihan, San Gwann SGN 9016 | Fax: (356) 21 385075 E-mail: newsroom@mediatoday.com.mt. Letters to the Editor should be concise. No pen names are accepted. Armed forces back on US military funds programme Conviction or convenience? Time is ripe for Broadcasting Authority reform Almost five years after I raised in Parliament the issue of full-time members of Parliament, the subject seems to have taken this country by storm sparked by a comment by Opposition Leader in the context of PN party financ- ing scandal. On the 7th March 2012 during sitting number 455 of the last legislature, in fact, as a Nation- alist backbencher I had invited a discussion about the subject proposing a smaller Parliament of full-time MPs within the wider context of a Holistic Constitu- tional and Justice Reform – www. riformagustizzja.com - including the draft Bill on Party Finance that has become law during this legislature whilst ignored during the past one. In March 2012 the current Opposition Leader was Law- rence Gonzi's special delegate to connect to society, whilst Tonio Borg, now included in the PN commission to evaluate this pro- posal, was deputy prime Minister. Highly ranking within govern- ment, they had all the clout to push for a discussion on this and other constitutional and justice proposals I had made. As far as I can remember, not only both ignored my proposals five years ago, but they went as far as banning me from contesting the following election after voting in Parliament, as I had every right to do, against the person who was blocking constitutional and jus- tice reform (which I had proposed and subsequently later confirmed by the Bonello Report), and cur- rently being implemented. It goes without saying that it would have made more sense for the Nationalist Party to discuss such issues when in government rather than in Opposition, espe- cially once they had been raised by one of their own party in Parliament and within the same party itself. Such failure could also throw serious doubts about the motive behind raising such issues five years later. Conviction or con- venience? Dr Franco Debono LLD Valletta Following the resignation of Broadcasting Authority chairper- son Tanya Borg Cardona, govern- ment has an opportunity to rise above the tribal political division and reform an authority which sadly represents the political par- ties and their partisan interests rather than the Maltese people in general. The Broadcasting Authority chairperson should be appointed by a Parliamentary Committee after a public call for applications. This would guarantee inde- pendence, especially when the authority's board is responsible to ensure that public broadcasting is impartial and fair. The authority's regulations are already skewed in favour of the big parties. The notion that political parties 'balance each other out' renders a disservice to democracy, pluralism and quality in broadcasting. The authority must encourage and not discourage pluralism of ideas and modes of expression. Now is the time to change the way the authority operates and ensure that at least the public broadcaster gives more space to smaller parties and civil society, who unlike the two major parties do not own and control media empires. The most urgent issue to be addressed is the authority's com- position. The Broadcasting Authority should be truly independent, and should be led by professionals and civil society representatives not political appointees. Despite its function as a Consti- tutional Body, two members are chosen by the Prime Minister, two mem- bers are chosen by the Leader of the Opposition, and the chairperson is nominated by the minister responsible for broadcasting or by the Prime Minister. Effectively, the authority is con- trolled by persons chosen by and in the interests of the two main political parties. This enforces the perception that political interests come before the public interest, which erodes trust in the authority itself. A reformed authority should primarily work to raise standards of broadcasting in Malta and protect viewers and listeners and not political parties. The presence of broadcasting experts together with civil society representatives would help bring a paradigmatic change in broad- casting and give it a much needed breath of fresh air. Edward Busuttil Birkirkara