Author: Jacques René Zammit

Categories
Immigration Mediawatch Politics Values

The Arab Mosque of Msida

mosquea_akkuza

Somehow it does not have the same appeal as the “American University of Malta” does it? It’s Arab, not American, it’s a Mosque, not a University, and its Msida… as in, since when does Msida have more appeal other than being a huge roundabout adorned by a garish monument and kiosks?  There still seems to be a more tangible and realistic demand for the Arab Mosque of Msida than for the ultra-fictitious American University of Malta. It may be because the latter is neither American nor a University and is only sited in Malta because the great salesman of Castille was conned into prostituting virgin land to a construction specialist from the Emirates. The former is required because there are quite a number of practicing muslims who have no place to gather for prayer.

When Germany started to feel the weight of the large influx of refugees from Syria and around, questions started to be asked of the neighbouring Gulf states and whether they too would be prepared to take some of the millions of displaced people. Saudi Arabia’s reply was curious. They would not take the refugees themselves but offered to help Germany integrate the muslims. By building mosques. In Germany.

Of course this was before the nightmare situation of the New Years’ Eve groping sessions from Cologne to Bielfeld to Hamburg. Even so, the Saudi proposal was met with disdain as it brought to life themonstrous menace  of a cultural invasion. Mosques are not exactly the top priority for building projects in Europe right now. Which is probably why France’s mosques held an open day on Saturday in order to allow non-muslims to see how they were really places meant for prayer and peace. Islam, the religion of submission  to the will of God (inshallah) is all about peace (salaam), they said.

Back to Malta. Some nutter with no idea of PR decided that the best thing for the muslim community to do in these times of high sensistivity and sensibility where cliches are shot as rapidly as a kalashnikov in the wrong hands was to organise an open air prayer meeting – of the kind Angelik does – in full view. The idea was to show how the muslims in Malta did not have enough places of prayer – the Paola mosque was not enough and using a garage to congregate is considered illegal.

Some questions do need to be asked though. The muslim community has grown considerably and there is probably a justified demand for a new place of prayer. Our constitution safeguards and respects the right of other religions and the freedom to worship is one of the fundamental rights that are recognised. The question of whether a new mosque is needed should be examined in this light – outside of the panic and fear-mongering linked with recent international events. It is not about us and them either. We are either a nation that is selling passports by the hundreds (and it has been made abundantly clear what creed and nationality are the major targets for this campaign) or we are not. These are Maltese citizens who happen to be muslim that need catering for.

Much fuss was made when it was suggested that the new Sadeen Not-So American and not so University of ODZonqor might require a mosque of its own given its target of 3,500 students. It’s not so funny now is it? The Slovaks have questionably closed their borders to anybody who is muslim – no muslim refugees. This questionable decision is not an option here. We are dutibound to look hard into our constitution and our core values and understand that a new mosque is necessary in order to guarantee worshiping rights to some of our citizens.

What is funny, or interesting, is that neither the developers of this land nor some new shady business partner from the Gulf have made contact with this government of plentiful opportunity in order to market a new deal. As I said in the beginning the Arab Mosque of Msida (or wherever the government might decide to sell land) is never going to be an attractive option. Which is a pity really, because at the end of the day the building of a mosque as a place for congregation for the muslim citizens of the land would actually be a clear sign that Malta’s constitutional values are strong and alive – that in this country you are free to worship so long as you respect others and respect the core values of the community.

Categories
Mediawatch Politics

Pardon their Frenċ

frenc_akkuza

The Għarb Local Council have gone all hot under the collar about what they call “allegations” made by Katie Holmes, mother of convicted Welshman Daniel Holmes. In yet another appeal to have Daniel’s punishment shortened from the draconian 10 years, Katie Holmes mentioned the fact that the man considered by many to be holy and known as Frenċ tal-Għarb had also used cannabis to cure people. Well, it turns out that hell knows no fury like a Local Council who deems that its Holy Man hath been scorned. The representatives of the tiny (and beautiful) Gozitan village whose name means “The West” resort to threatening Katie Holmes with a case of defamation/libel. In their mind it was the most they could do short of issuing a challenge in the village pjazza at the stroke of the midday bell.

A little aside here. By some twist of cosmic fate all this happened on the first anniversary of the Charlie Hebdo killings. You know the ones that I am talking about – the ones where the whole world asked itself whether a bunch of lame satirists had gone a step too far into “provoking” a bloody response from the fanatical and the ignorant. On a much lesser scale of cosmic importance I had also just blogged about the irrational and disproportionate reaction in Kyrgyzstan to a facebook post about a national dish.

Back to the West. The dramatis personae of this little farce makes raw material for a magical novel of the Garcia Marquez kind. We have the beleaguered mother of a man condemned by a hypocritical society to rot away in its prisons while former drug traffickers and conspirators hobnob with the leaders of the land. She could be pictured like the desperate Magdalene and Mary at the foot of the cross, heart torn apart by all the suffering caused to her son. Katie Holmes was hoping to inspire empathy with her story about the Gozitan faith healer and expert herbalist. Cannabis, she was saying, should not be seen in such a bad light in this country after all when it is so plain that some good can come out of it.

What of Frenċ? Well, I can tell you a bit about Frenċ the man and quasi-scientist. I have people in my family who, years before internet turned the world into a global village, had benefited from his healing “powers’. No marijuana was harmed in that particular feat since the stories I am told seem to have involved much more the power of conviction than anything else. Frenċ is known to have used herbs and plants endemic to the islands in order to help ailing visitors. That and a dose of Hail Marys and Our Fathers to be fair, but the latter part of the healing process are of little use in this story. We live in a world where we are oblivious to the fact that the ingredients in every medicinal we take find their origin in herbs.

You’d have to be an idiot though not to have heard of the medicinal effects of cannabis. It would be no surprise then were Frenċ to have prescribed its use to a suffering patient (that and a dose of Hail Marys of course). Cannabis just goes to be added to the long list of herbs and plants with beneficial properties such as chamomile (weariness, bowel inflammation), poppy (asthma, bronchitis, whooping cough), rosemary (headaches, epilepsy, circulation), sage (headaches, cough), primrose (rest, sedative) and lavender (fainting and nausea). Around Frenċ’s time on this earth, in London in 1916, Harrods were selling a kit described as “A Welcome Present for Friends at the Front” containing cocaine, morphine, syringes and needles. Also, heroin was sent to the soldiers in the trenches since it had the reputation of being particularly effective against tuberculosis and pneumonia.

So would Frenċ the man and herbalist (as against Frenċ the icon) have been so out of line had he really used cannabis as is alleged by Ms Holmes? Not really. At most he would have been a visionary and far ahead of his time.

Which brings me to the final actor in this dramatis personae. The Local Council. I cannot help but picture them as the Jewison portrayed the Sanhedrin in Jesus Christ Superstar. Standing on the scaffolding bare chested they pound their fists on the metal angry at the allegations and shit-stirring as they perceive it. “Must die must die this Jesus must die.”

There is no amount of WTFs that can be plastered outside their council door in order to emphasise the base stupidity of their actions. How on earth do they represent Frenċ in court anyway? Is this a class action? Did they ask themselves whether this is what Frenċ would have wanted? Again, from what I hear about the man he was blessed with an incredible amount of practicality and logic – which is probably what made him stand out so much in the first place. That such logic and intelligence was imbued with a heavy dose of humility must have been a great asset to the man. Such assets are alas lacking among the egregious members of the Gharb Local Council. They want their pound of flesh and they want it fast – all because it is alleged that Frenċ used the right herb to do the right thing.

Frenċ is Gozitan (ok, Maltese too) for Francis. Just like the Pope. You know, that man in Rome who is taking great strides in reconciling the church with the man in the street. He once said that a little mercy makes the world less cold and more just. If the councillors cannot find it in themselves to recognise the ridiculous nature of their actions and if they cannot realise that their quest is akin to that of any fanatic eager to exact his revenge upon anyone who they deem has insulted them, then and only then should they at least resort to being merciful and retract their pompous threats of libel and defamation action.

 

Categories
Mediawatch

Europe, Gender, Demographics & Shakespeare

gender_akkuza

Sex. There’s much talking about sex these days. For starters the immigration agenda has taken a bizarre sexual twist ever since the New Year’s Eve events in Cologne when males of an Arab/Middle Easten complexion assaulted a large number of women taking advantage of the cover afforded by the holiday celebration confusion. As if the immigration issue were not a problem on its own, the further twist in the tale has meant that new warning signs have been flagged as to the huge gender imbalance when it comes to the influx of refugees to Europe.

Most refugees, about one in four, are male and the prediction doing the rounds is that this will cause a huge demographic shift in Europe with an even worse male to female ratio than already exists. We were used to hearing how the new wave of immigrants were beneficial for the economy in the long run, how they would plug the holes caused by the low birth rate in Europe and how they could be part of a long-term solution to solve the pension time-bomb. The worry now is that there are too many men among them. The danger in this sense is sociological since it turns out that social scientists have long been telling us that violence is linked not to poverty or religion but to the failure to provide a critical mass of young men with something constructive to do.

Which is ironic really since Europe with its crisis-driven unemployment rate had already a large mass of bored young men who could have been easily attracted to violence. Little wonder really that the perpetrators of the Paris attacks were homegrown Europeans and not refugees from the latest Syrian conflicts. The warnings do not stop there. Skewed sex ratios in immigration flux means not only new dangerous masses in Europe but also the neutering of the countries of origin. Those left behind will never be able to recover and reconstruct. The Single Male Refugee risks becoming a new problem.

Funny then that the new director (Emma Rice, the first female artistic director) of the Globe theatre – the spiritual home of Shakespearean drama – has chosen her debut season to skewer the figures of acting on stage. She believes that more females should take up the male roles in theatre and has set a 50/50 numerus clausus for performances. It is not only Lady Macbeth who will be calling to be “unsexed” in the future – this banal effort at ultra-feminism threatens the foundations of Shakespearean drama but is set to mirror the absurd results we are now used to seeing when it comes to promoting feminist extremes.

It is dangerous to define the issue of immigration on the basis of gender. A refugee’s nature should not be determined by gender but by nature of his or her plight. While the perils of massing large numbers of unemployed men in Europe are understandable the solution should lie beyond a banalisation of some kind of gender driven numerus clausus. All the world may be a stage, but emulating the Globe’s new artistic director’s trends would be quite a comedy of errors.

Categories
Mediawatch Politics Travel

The Pastizzi of Kyrgyzstan

kyrgyzstan

Michael McFeat is a Scot gold miner in Kyrgyzstan. A couple of days ago, during the holiday celebrations, he posted a photo on Facebook showing his mates at the mine queuing up to eat a Kyrgyz delicacy called chuchuk that is apparently a sausage made up of parts of horse. In his caption to the photo McFeat described the national dish as resembling a horse’s penis. Which is when all hell broke lose. His fellow miners threatened to strike and began a petition for his arrest. Indeed, his arrest followed promptly and he is now accused under Kyrgyz law of inciting racial hatred and risks five years in prison. All this for comparing a national dish to a horse’s penis.

It’s one of those comic bits of news that tend to lighten up the New Years’ roll-call – comic that is, unless you are Michael McFeat. He’s unlucky this Michael. If luck had its way he would have been in Malta instead and snapped a photo of a queue outside one of our many pastizzeriji. He would then have been quite free to post it on facebook with a caption stating that Maltese tend to form queues in order to get their hands on a dish that resembles a womans’ private parts. It’s no secret either. There are parts of the country where pastizz is slang for vagina – and these tend to be parts of the country that tend to have a more real “feel” of the language.

McFeat would never have ended up in prison. Well. We cannot say that with absolute certainty can we? Not with the amount of crazy that goes into applying the law on the island of developers and salesmen. You can see it kicking off with a petition while the online barrage of attacks of “Go back to your country” and “Don’t touch my pastizzi” kick off.

The President of the Republic might deem it decorous to step in and defend the plate of the poor people launching a Pastizzi Telethon featuring all the VIP’s of the land in defence of the pastizz. Meanwhile the Prime Minister will immediately negotiate 25 pastizzi kiosk concessions along the islands shore (on ODZ land of course) dubbing it the Wignacourt Circle of Pastizzi. In a speech on National Television Muscat will stand on a custom made pastizz-shaped lectern and grind his teeth menacingly at anyone who threatens to instil the fear of the pastizz among the population. Anyone who criticises the pastizz is negative, and anyone who is negative has no point in living.

Is this too fantastical? Is it too far-fetched? Are you sure? As 2016 stepped in with an Alice in Wonderland message by Joseph Muscat framed in lie upon lie upon lie we would do well to ask more questions of whatever is fed into our heads – particularly whatever is fed into our heads about what it means to be Maltese. The danger is that the few values that are left that distinguish us as a nation risk making pastizzi out of all us.

Happy 2016. May it bring a heavy dose of critical-mindedness, may it whisk away any traces of gullibility and may it signify a return to the discovery of a set of values that define us properly as a nation within Europe.

It’s either that or pastizzi.

 

Categories
Admin

Gone Feasting

akkuza_feast

 

The festive season came early here at J’accuse. We forgot to log off and wish our readers all the best. We’ll be back with the New Year. Recharged.

Thanks for reading and hanging on with this blog as it starts its 11th year.

This has been J’accuse… blogging so you don’t have to.

Categories
Constitutional Development

More fool the law

more fool the law _ akkuza

An evil soul producing holy witness is like a villain with a smiling cheek, quoth the bard. In matters legal we are often confronted with devils citing scriptures for their purpose and recently there seems to have been quite an upping of the scripture-quoting ante, if you get my drift. The Ian Borg planning permit saga drags on without so much as a whiff of a preventive suspension of duties. PM Muscat was quite clear, in his usual style used whenever clarity and convenience collide, that it was up to Borg to do what he should do. Borg, having adamantly proclaimed his innocence and shown that he does not give two hoots about whatever investigations may result declared firstly that he would proceed with his development. It was only after a sobering comment by Muscat that Borg retracted – on facebook of course.

Muscat’s comments were the most worrying in fact. He was definitely not satisfied with Ombudsman Report on Case no EP 0032 and did not hesitate to openly allege that it was beset with inaccuracies. In fact, not only does the modern day leader of steel not agree with the Ombudsman’s conclusions but also promised to set straight certain “mistakes” that are apparently contained therein. It really does beg the question of why bother listening to the Ombudsman in the first place if you are not going to give any weight to anything he has to say. Well, probably Muscat has been listening to a few scripture-quoting devils who have opted to dabble in the arcane arts of legal interpretation within their self-declared hobby/profession of all that is to do with planning.

What really sticks out whenever you read any of these apologia pro Ian Borg in the press is a quasi-autistic literal-mindedness that belies any knowledge of constitutional responsibility. You see a literal approach to the law can provide some very interesting and confusing results. The Ian Borg Saga is not about any old pesky MEPA application but about the “incorrect application of policies and procedures in processing and determining” a particular  application in Rabat.

Legally (and by this I mean also to include the literal application of the law)  there is the issue of sticking to the procedural minutiae of an application and whether what might seem to be ridiculous situations – such as a non-owner making an application- are actually allowed by law. There is also a second legal question and that is whether the permit application as filled led to MEPA wrongly acquiescing to the request.

Outside the box of literal-minded application there is an important constitutional element. A member of parliament – a parliamentary secretary to boot – is involved in this application. I say involved but ultimately we can say committed in the same way that in an English breakfast the chicken is involved but the pig is committed. The property that is the subject of this controversy is owned by Ian Borg. He is not denying it. Nobody is. The problem lies that if it should result that Borg, a government secretary, abused of MEPA procedure in order to obtain a go-ahead for this development in a property owned by him he has constitutional obligations that go beyond the mere examination of whose name appears on the application and whether that is legit.

Reading through the Ombudsman’s Report (that could admittedly have been a bit more clear) we find two important issues that tie to the constitutional responsibility of Ian Borg.

  1. The issue is not whether or not it is permissible for someone to apply on behalf of a third party. The issue is whether, when doing so, it was clear that whoever the applicant was, if he was not the sole owner (or not an owner) then he indicated that he notified the owner of his intention to apply. This is provided for in Section 15 of the application form (under article 68(3) of the Planning Act). The point that the Ombudsman makes in page 6 of his report is that in this particular application the applicants who were not the owners did not indicate as much – they actually “incorrectly stated that they were owners”. This is when the Ombudsman opts for the words “it is strange that Dr Borg chose a somewhat devious method to file the application”. The application contains an untruth. While it is true that you can still apply if you are not the owner, you are meant to do so while declaring that you are not the owner and indicating that the owner has granted his consent. This is what results from the Ombudsman’s description of the case. Given Ian Borg’s parliamentary position the omission assumes constitutional importance.
  2. The second important point made by the Ombudsman is, to put it simply, that the description given in a previous application that ended up being refused by MEPA was altered in this new application. The result is that notwithstanding that “there was no change in policy in the intervening period between the refusal of PA 1637/12 and the submission of PA 2708/14”, MEPA seems to have requalified the new application in order to get the green light for the application made by somebody for the development on Ian Borg’s property. One defence being made here is that a literal application of the planning policy  would lead to the green light being given because the former application had a built up area of less than 50 metres squared while the new application being for a 100 metres squared building would qualify. Now bear with me for a moment but what we are effectively stating is that when a plan for development was for less than 50 metres squared MEPA would object to such development tooth and nail BUT by exploiting a loophole in the law if we present a larger development plan that transforms magically “fresh land” into a backyard in the building suddenly everything is fine and dandy.

Quite frankly the combination of the two issues listed above put Ian Borg in dangerous waters. Even with all the goodwill he may claim to have had there is still definitely more to this than meets the eye and it does the PL no good to hang on behind its young soldier. We’ll have to wait for the Commission against Corruption whose remit is closer to the constitutional factors that I mentioned than the Ombudsman’s.