Tag: Ecclesiastical Tribunal

Categories
Articles

J’accuse : The Hack

Today’s J’accuse on the Malta Independent on Sunday (28.08.11)

It’s hard to concentrate when you’ve been hacked. Not physically I mean. It’s just that J’accuse, the blog − the depository of my almost daily thoughts for almost seven years − was hacked by some git supposedly based in Ukraine. Notwithstanding the valorous efforts of a number of tech-savvy comrades, the hack persisted in doing its malicious business for the past three days − said business consisting of “redirecting” visitors to Google and distributing “malware”.

This particular hack had a little “robot” planted into my site via some seemingly innocuous programming that supports a website theme. Without going into too much detail, what happened next was that at some point the “robot” decided to start redirecting anybody attempting to enter www.akkuza.com to a site hosted in Russia. Apart from being very frustrating, this “malware” − for thusly have the nerds baptised this ill of the ether − has the effect of debilitating your “street cred” on the net.

Over a short period of time, your address becomes a pariah to browser after browser because someone at the net-police in Google headquarters decided to flag your address as a potentially malicious carrier of ugly information. Before you know it, you find yourself quarantined in a virtual Lazaretto without so much as a limestone wall to carve your name on. Which is how I ended up rebuilding J’accuse from scratch on Friday night till the early hours of Saturday morning. J’accuse is running now and its net credibility has been repristinated. It’s incredible how hard a bit of Internet slagging can hit you… but hey we all know how thick J’accuse’s skin is.

Hang on

I had a dream that consisted of a crazed Muammar Gaddafi in exile travelling around “his” Africa filming little snippets with a videocam and commenting, “My people, they love me”. The theatricals of the tyrant in the last violent throes of his deposition have been starkly surreal. In the midst of all the firing and chaos, who does Gaddafi call? The Russian head of the World Chess Player Federation that’s who. He called Mr Ilyumzhinov to tell him that he was alive and well (just in case the Russian was thinking of checking in on his friend) and this call was reported in a manner that made it seem like the most normal conversations. The world, as you know it, is crumbling around you and you find time to call your chess partner? Checkmate.

Oh the irony. We normally attribute the term “checkmate” to Arabic origins. The phrase “Shah mat” is explained as meaning “the King is Dead” in common lore. Apparently, the Persian phrase Shah mat does not actually mean that the king is dead but rather that “the king is helpless”. Which makes more sense because the checkmate position in chess involves the noble realisation that your king is in an indefensible corner and that the next step is the gallant toppling of your own king in humble acceptance of the inevitability of defeat. Gaddafi will wander around “helpless” for a few more days, or maybe months – everybody but Muammar has realised the inevitability of his defeat. Shah mat.

Hold on

Gaddafi’s lessons in chess over a 10-year period do not seem to have included the noble art of accepting the inevitability of defeat. The tyrant hangs on for his dear life and his power, still backed by the die-hard rebels. He has become the latest tyrant on the run, a fugitive spitting away from a corner − just like Adolf and Saddam before him. Even the greatest foot shufflers and fence sitters have finally begun to publicly denounce the Green Leader and throw their lot in with the new leadership. Malta − or the slower part of it − has begun to realise the inevitability of having to rewrite its relationship with its southern neighbour.

While one powerful man gave us a lesson on how not to relinquish power, another man of a completely different cut was in the news this week. Steve Jobs, the famed Apple CEO, resigned from his post as CEO of what is probably one of the world’s most powerful companies. His resignation reverberated around the world of tech-nerds and stock markets. Apple shares shot down for a while − such was the confidence in this guru of marketing who had reinvented two worlds in one lifetime. Jobs, the man who re-branded Apple via snazzy computers and a music world revolution, has chosen to step aside.

Steve Jobs could not just teach us one lesson. He could have his own faculty in a university to teach us lessons in life, from business acumen to surviving illnesses after facing death in the face. If there is one lesson Jobs could teach us right now it is that of knowing when to quit: “I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.” There you have it. The King is dead. Long live King Jobs.

Scraping the ethical barrel

Lastly, allow me a few words on the Julia Farrugia business. It has been intriguing for me to monitor the reaction to the decision of the Press Ethics Committee regarding MaltaToday’s reporting of the Joe Mizzi Affair. You’ll find a full review of the issue on the J’accuse post entitled “De Moribus Viator”. What I found particularly jarring was the repetition of what happened in the Plategate Affair a while back. Instead of discussing the ethics of what was done (and instead of addressing the issue of improving the ethical performance of the Maltese journalistic sector), what counts for Malta’s opinion press and opinion formers pounced on the opportunity to engage in their national sport: character assassination.

If denouncing the free manner in which any excuse is a good excuse for a slag contest makes me a speaker from a high horse then call me a cavalier. When I am accused of speaking from the “moral high ground” because I have denounced the lax standards of the gutter press, the accuser fails to realise that this IS all about morality and ethics. The moment that you make the mental choice to accept the kind of sewer-bred smear tactics that are perpetrated daily in the Maltese media you become a willing accomplice of that dirt.

Gode di Immunità

Debbie Schembri left a note on Facebook informing the world that she is happy to have been reinstated as a lawyer in the Ecclesiastical Tribunal. To people like myself, Schembri’s message is once again equivocal to say the least. I had high hopes that the likes of Schembri would survive the divorce debate to form a Civil Rights movement that would press on to reform our laws. One such important reform would be the divorce between Church and state matters − a marriage that has only harmed both parties since 1995.

Schembri had no obligation or duty to do any of this. It is disappointing to see the “bright star” of Maltese progressive politics melt into the establishment day after day. First there was no Civil Rights movement − Debbie preferred to join opportunist Labour; now there is no hurry to divorce Church from State − Debbie is quite happy to perform her duties as a church approved lawyer. Ah Tommasi di Lampedusa… how right you were.

End credits

Allow me to thank Max, Mark and Simon for their assistance in the latest ordeal for J’accuse. The blog keeps the flag flying. Expect a few more tweaks in the coming days.

www.akkuza.com is officially no longer in Google’s black books. Normal service has been resumed and the blog that has entertained you since March 2005 is back to its normal pain in the butt status.

Categories
Articles

Non Gode di Immunità Ecclesiastica

Fully qualified law graduate and state approved lawyer Dr Deborah Schembri has been told that she may no longer practice as a lawyer in the Church tribunal “because she is spreading incorrect information on the indissolubility of Catholic marriage”. There has always existed a possibility that a lawyer is suddenly “debarred” from duty before the ecclesiastical curia. Nobody – no liberal, progressive or otherwise (except maybe the eccentric Dr Bezzina) – had ever squeaked an ounce of protest regarding this state of affairs, perhaps because of our instinctive reaction of “why bother?”

The legal system of the catholic church is the oldest legal system still in use today. Named the Rota after the round rooms in which the judges originally heard cases, the church courts have jurisdiction over judicial trials related to the Catholic church. In our country, ever since the 1995 Marriage Act, the church’s jurisdiction extends to civil affairs insofar as church decisions on annulment have a civil validity. Boiled down to the bare minimum that means that the decisions of the church regarding who may practice as a lawyer before its tribunals are no longer a question, as Fr Gouder would like to have it, of “either believing or not”. Persons appearing before the church courts do NOT have a right to the lawyer of choice – and that is the crux of the matter.

With all due respect to Dr Deborah Schembri this is not matter of her livelihood (she chose to work within the system and therefore should comply fully with its requirements) – it is a matter of citizens of the state being deprived of a lawyer of their choice in proceedings they may submit to involuntarily. Kudos to Dr Balzan of the Chamber of Advocates for having pointed out that the right to choose ones own lawyer should not be limited in any way – sadly it was a typical knee-jerk reaction that had long been past its due date. Unfortunately, the divorce matter at hand has watered down the crucial highlighting of this abominable anomaly that results from the Church-State agreement.

Weapon of Choice
For the word on the street is not about this issue of a “right to a lawyer” but focuses instead on the Church’s “bullying”. The ignorant (for they ignore) crowds are even pressing with a petition for the “reinstatement of Deborah Schembri” – proving thusly that they have not seen the real problem underlying this issue. This is not, may I point out, a choice between Barabbas and Christ for it is not the representative of Ceasar who is deciding here. We have the indirect work of the successor of Peter interpreting an Apostolic Letter (Justi Judicis). The rabble has been wrongly roused.

At the heart of it all is our incredible inability to distinguish between the sacred and the profane. We cannot fathom why the church has every right as a social participant to send messages to its flock about its position on divorce while at the same time we claim to be fighting for a more liberal society where EVERY social participant has a right to express their point of view. Sure, the Church is inadvertently uncovering the weakness of this particular flock on the island of Paul – the flock that needs cushioning from the free choice that God gave them – and in doing so is proving to be a shaky witness to the sturdiness and incorruptibility of christian morals.

We may have Ministers that practically have a directly line with the Madonna (as if Angelik was not enough) but our particular brand of Catholics want a “choice-free” Malta for otherwise the flock would be so weak as to succumb to sin at the first opportunity: just remember DJ Cordina whose objection to divorce was that it would make him think about the option from the moment it was possible. Basically our specific version of the church, in conspiracy with the state is one massive prophylactic covering the island from any possibility of deviant activity. Onward Christian soldiers? More like pampered kids without a sense of volition… the naked ape indeed.

Praise You
This week’s Lou Bondi show was a pleasant surprise what with the presence of artists and writers discussing Malta and the Maltese. I was irritated by Lou’s confusing “Value” with “Identity” in his search for typical Maltese “values”. Gozitan author Pierre Mejlak was spot on when stating that we probably share most of our values with people close to our islands. I did find one moment to be particularly telling though. When Brikkuni vocalist Mario Vella intervened in a discussion about “il-Bar ta’ Taht il-Knisja” (the Bar below/Beside the Church) – a Brikkuni classic – he was defensive about the role of the “church” in the lyrics.

While Lou and the rest of the panel rightly examined the lyrics from the perspective of the interaction in society under the watchful gaze of the church, Vella – who I like to think of as a liberal and progressive musician (an appreciation from the lyrics of his music, if not nothing else) was dismissive of the importance being given to the Church in this particular appreciation. According to Vella the church was simply an indication of the geographic location of the bar and he seemed to imply that too much was read into the role of the church in that song. Vella’s stance was quasi-apologetic – and to me disappointingly inexplicable.

I may be wrong. Vella might very well have used the church as a geographical (and not moral) compass in the song but I get the feeling that once again the “censor in your head” syndrome was clearly manifesting its ugly head. Same goes for Deborah Schembri. Her apologetic reaction after the news of her debarring broke gave the impression that she is more concerned with being “reinstated” than with challenging the legal anomaly affecting the rights of representation of citizens in a tribunal with state and civil powers. Give us this day our daily bread.

The Rockafeller Skank – Intermezzo
I’ve begun to apologise whenever a long article is in the making. This is one of them for it has been a bountiful week, so may I suggest a quick cuppa before you return for the rest of the show. Unlike Lou I do not have an interminable rosary of adverts between different parts of the programme so you’ll have to make do with your imagination or look up the sublime Brikkuni pieces on YouTube for a musically pleasant interlude.

That Green Jesus
If figuring out the fine line between sacred and the profane was not enough, the news that broke on Saturday’s papers was guaranteed a full blown “national discussion” as we know best. The people had been informed of the decision to shift the icon that is the Triton Fountain to a different place on the Floriana plateau and away from the vacuum of vacuums that the Place Formerly Known As City Gate is fast becoming. It would seem that the law of open spaces (and the administrative connivance of those in power) hath decreed that the maravilious monument to giants would be removed from its position of prominence.

Maltese Identity? Would you imagine Piazza Navona without its obelisks? How about shifting the Trevi Fountain to a more “convenient” spot? Imagine a reshuffle of Washington’s monuments in order to accommodate some new-fangled plan. You cannot, can you. Of course not. I cannot put my finger on it but I have a feeling that this too has to do with our inability to be more assertive about our identity. When even our national treasures (for it is a treasure) can fall victim to redecoration by the temporary temporal powers, it means that the planner believes himself to be greater than the treasure itself. It says much about the importance that we attribute to our heritage.

Right Here, Right Now
It is perhaps fitting that my long stay in Malta with a task list full of wedding preparations had to end the day Prince William and Kate get to tie the knot. If you were one of the millions watching the ceremony you will have notice the immense sense of occasion that only the Brits can pull off. They are definitely assisted with the presence of monuments and heritage that go back a thousand years (since the marriage of William the Conqueror in Westminster).

For me it is time to return to the Duchy. Sadly, I leave a day too early and will miss the Norman Cook concert that is bound to have been magnificent by the time you read this article. Fatboy Slim… now that describes my targets until next November – from Fatboy to Slim … hopefully I’ll make it in time for the wedding.

www.akkuza.com – the sacred, the profane and the wedding fantastic all in one blog