Tag: immigration

Categories
Mediawatch Rubriques

I.M. Jack – the pauline edition

imjack

Gone fishing or the Public Accounts Committee

I caught a glimpse of the proceedings at the Public Accounts Committee sessions. Inelegant and clumsy are the first words that come to mind. It was never meant to be a fashion statement or synchronised swimming, sure, but the overall impression before getting down to the nitty gritty is that of yet another debasement of institutional tradition.

Sitting in the metaphorical witness dock former PM Lawrence Gonzi had his patience tried by repeat questioning that seemed to be going nowhere. There was a moment of dramatic irony when Gonzi accused the Committee of not following the procedure it should (that of the COCP) when the Committee was actually chaired by (and therefore under the responsibility of) Jason Azzopardi of team PN.

Still, the line of questioning taken up by Justice Minister seems to be one of spurious fabrication very much in line with the journalistic style at MaltaToday (which revels in the idea of having kicked off this fracas in the first place) rather than the quest for some truth or other (in a land of multiple truths the first to the media machine is King). What exactly is the PAC after? What is this Enemalta business proving in the end?

In all probability this business, like surely many others to come, will prove that businesses, businessmen and corrupt persons in power (and by this I mean persons appointed to manage/run/sit on parastatal entities) will constantly try to find a convergence point in the shadows and suck from the public funds so long as they are not caught.

Amnesties and amnesia

It was also very interesting to watch the Justice Minister justify the line of questioning by claiming that the amnesty (proklama really) requires constant checking since one of the conditions it contains is that it can be withdrawn if the person enjoying its benefits is found to have hidden the truth.

So we have a “businessman” who is benefiting from an amnesty in order to assist the authorities in uncovering illicit activity by other “businessmen”. The current government’s line seems to be to question this amnesty (with the concurrent risk that many other people might end up not being brought to justice).

While all this is happening we have another sector (construction and development) in which the government seems to be adamant to offer a blanket amnesty to all those who have abused of the law (broken it) and partaken in the rape of the nation (metaphorically speaking). The Taghna Lkoll government has made no effort to hide its tight links to the Malta Developer’s Association and it’s erstwhile Chairman (or is he President?) Sandro Chetcuti.

There is no whistleblowing reason for an amnesty here. The feeble excuse that Taghna Lkoll philosophy can throw up (yes, like vomit) is that those paying for the amnesty will generate lots of money for the coffers. A blanket amnesty that allows people to buy scars on the face of the nation. Brilliant. So long as Sandro tells us that everything is just fine for the developers we must all be grateful.

Kulcha and Karnival

It may seem too facile an argument but the priorities of Taghna Lkoll in the field of culture are so obviously linked to core voting interests that you cannot but argue on the lines that sound both snobbish and classist. As the effort to denigrate the City Gate project continues to gather momentum we are told of the Great Carnival and Music set of stalls that will offset the great vacuum that exists. Minister Bonnici (him again) told the gathered press that we cannot continue with this “silo mentality” – I must confess I had to look it up since I am not a FEMA graduate and find marketing catchphrases particularly undigestible.

It turns out that fighting the “silo mentality” means copying the design of garages and stalls that some Taghna Lkoll-ing carnival float enthusiast (and ONE employee) had visited on a trip abroad and spending some 6 million euros to build a sort of samba-drone that doubles up as a garage band gig place much to the chagrin of William Mangion.

Is it facile to argue that the ditched plans for the ditch/moat are crying for re-instatement and could well have done with some of those millions? Is it too easy to argue that while we appreciate that the carnival custom in Malta does deserve an investment of sorts (inclusive of a papier-mache’ museum) this should not come as an easy-fix solution that is obviously lacking in global planning?

Personally I love the idea of a regenerated part of Marsa hosting a carnival drove complete with museums and apprentice schools. It is the way these ideas suddenly pop up and are so very evidently the result of “lapazzar” planning simply to shut the mouths of another cohort of voters that is absolutely obnoxious. Stilll. It’s better than those bastard nationalists who never listened eh?

They’re drowning again

Far from the offices of wake up and smell the coffee. Far from the populistic approaches and ISIS scaremongering. There, in the deep blue tempest toss’d seas, more and more of them are dying. On the eve of the day when Malta celebrates the feast of Saint Paul’s Shipwreck, tens of immigrants who had left Tripoli in the hope of a better future lost their lives to the sea and the cold. What value those lives to the thousands who will throng the streets of the city of gentlemen adulating the Magnus who like the immigrants had been toss’d by the same sea?

Lawyers and Lawyers

Two issues. First the hunting then the constitutional case where the PN seems to have regained two seats. We had a parade of practising and retired lawyers stating the obvious (and then even complicating matters in interviews by not getting it quite right) when it came to referenda and their consequences. Did we need that charade? It reminded me of that farce re-enacted by Alfred Sant pre-1996 when he sat down with the an accommodating notary to sign a “contract with the people” – blissfully ignorant that the whole business of election, swearing-in and governing already covered the job.

As for the constitutional case. There is a glaring silence on the PN side when it comes to arguing which seats should be compensated and why. I watched a lawyer called Adrian Delia perform logical summersaults on an interview with newsbook.com.mt. He was clearly confused by the question as to whether or not Labour should have lost two seats in the process. Let us set aside the absolute hypocrisy of a PN representative talking about proportional representation in parliament – the proportionality has nothing to do with it.

The two candidates Buttigieg and Azzopardi were deprived of their seats because of an error by the Electoral Commission when the original set of parliamentary seats was being distributed. Thus Azzopardi lost out to Justyne Caruana for the fifth seat in the 13th district. If the error is admitted and the proper count repristinated then it should automatically follow that Caruana would lose her seat and Azzopardi would take it up (ths giving a 3-2 result for PN in Gozo). Same applies for the Edward Scicluna – Claudette Buttigieg situation.

The compensation of seats for proportional purposes takes place AFTER the original election of 5 candidates from each district. It has nothing to do with the error that took place BEFORE the proportional attribution. The PN request before the Civil Court should technically have included the request to have the Labour candidates erroneously elected replaced with the nationalist candidates who had been “cheated” by the error.

Happy Saint Paul’s feast to all J’accuse readers. We are one month away from our 10th anniversary of this blog. Thank you for your custom.

Categories
Mediawatch

Triton’s Sons

triton_akkuzaYet another tragedy has occurred in the Mediterranean. The Italian Marina Militare have found a fishing boat with around 600 people on board. 30 of these persons were dead in the hold – dead of asphyxia. As the mayor of Pozzallo decried the lack of space where to put the corpses, it is rumoured that (Commission Head Designate) Jean-Claude Juncker is mulling the idea of an ad hoc Commissioner for immigration.

Greek mythology has it that when Jason and the Argonauts were stranded on a Libyan lake (what could now be Xatt el Djerid near Carthage), Triton promised to assist them out of their predicament in exchange of a tripod that was in Jason’s possession. As Herodotus explains, Triton helped Jason and his Argonauts out of the lake and into the Mediterranean sea. History (and mythology that is an ancient way of “explaining” history) has a weird way of repeating itself.

Weird that Triton would come to the fore by assisting a pilgrim out of the Libyan deserts (Libya for the Greeks stretched from the Nile to the Atlantic) and into the Mediterranean. Weird that the deity inhabiting the Libyan cities would project such immigrants northwards, out of the dryness of the desert. Weirder still that this deity would be Triton who would command the seas with his conch and would be able to multiply into many Tritones – demons (daimones, dimonji) of the sea.

“carried him out of his course to the coast of Libya; where, before he discovered the land, he got among the shallows of Lake Tritonis. As he was turning it in his mind how he should find his way out, Triton (they say) appeared to him, and offered to show him the channel, and secure him a safe retreat, if he would give him the tripod. Jason complying, was shown by Triton the passage through the shallows; after which the god took the tripod, and, carrying it to his own temple, seated himself upon it, and, filled with prophetic fury, delivered to Jason and his companions a long prediction. “When a descendant,” he said, “of one of the Argo’s crew should seize and carry off the brazen tripod, then by inevitable fate would a hundred Grecian cities be built around Lake Tritonis.” The Libyans of that region, when they heard the words of this prophecy, took away the tripod and hid it. ” – Herodotus, Histories 

Categories
Arts

Move back

Dedikata lit-tlett mitt ruħ li tilfu ħajjithom qrib Lampedusa, fejn il-Gżira tal-Fniek. 

“Move back”, serra snienu
Idejh imdawra ggranfati ma’ l-istering.

Ħsibijietu,

bejn it-traffiku infern quddiemu
taħt sema’ jnixxi ilmijiet
li lanqas Noe ma qatt ra bħalhom,
id-dlam li jagħma kesa l-ajru
u t-tpaqpiq inċessanti tat-traffiku
mat-tpeċlieq reddieni tal-passiġġiera
dieħel itambar ġewwa rasu

Għajnejh,

jilmħu fil-mera mżejna rużarji
wiċċ ix-xjaten suwed emmissarji
mibgħuta jitturufnawh fil-wied ta’ rwieh mitlufa
u ma jiflaħx iktar

“Move back, ħaqqalla” (għax id-dagħa huwa obbligu)
“Or go back to your country”

♦

“It’s time to wake up and smell the coffee”
Bir-road map quddiemu jiddandan daqs pagun

Ħsibijietu,

mgħarrqa taħt wiegħdiet u illużjoni
imbandla f’baħar ċekkijiet li qatt ma se jissarfu
miżgħuda bil-piż ta’ responsabilità li qatt ma basar
mejtin għal kapru espijatorju
għal Ażażel baħri tal-bnazzi

Ħalqu,

jitgħawweġ u jitkemmex fit-truf
bejn tbissima għax ġietu tajba
u oħra qarsa tal-verità mhix magħrufa
għax jafha hu biss
filwaqt li jbellgħa t-togħma tar-rebħa
għax bi kliemu jġib l-ilma jiżfen

“Push back” intranżiġenti
Pero tinkwetawx.. nieħdu ħsieb nisa u tfal

♦

“Waan ku jecelahay” qaltlu bid-dmugħ nieżel ma’ ħaddejha
…”jiena nħobbok”

Ħsibijietha,

marru f’art twelidhom,
fl-infern li ħallew warajhom
fit-tama ta’ bidu ġdid,
marru fl-ewwel darba li ratu
dik it-tbissima dawl f’deżert ta’ dieqa
dik il-ħarsa torri f’nofs armata ħażen u biża’,
marru f’jum żwieġhom
f’jum twelid binhom
fi vjaġġi tul deżerti u fost kriminali

Għajnejha,

lemħu ġisem żewġha,
l-aħħar qtar ta’ ħajtu jnixxi minn ġo fih
bħaldonnu mgħaġġla jeħilsu minn saħtet l-art,
lemħu t-tarbija tolfoq dmugħ
u raw lil Karonti jgħajjat xi ordni
(li widnejha la semgħu u lanqas kienu jifhmu)

U lemħu dawl blu jpetpet
raw l-anġlu joħroġ idu u jerfa’ lilha u lil binha
raw il-kutra tgħattiha

u reħiet għal mument id-destin tagħha f’idejn ħaddieħor

“Waan ku jecelaway” qaltlu bid-dmugħ nieżel ma’ ħaddejha
…. inħobbok.

 

Categories
Immigration

Salamis

It has been described as one of the most significant battles in human history. Had the invading forces been victorious it would have signified the end of Western Civilisation as we know it. It all happened at Salamis, 480 years before the birth of Christ.

At Salamis almost 2500 years ago Xerxes’ Persian forces were once again trying to gain an inroad into the land occupied by a number of city states. Thanks to some wily moves, a bit of luck and some help from the elements (the Gods?), the Greek states managed to ward off the Persian danger yet again. Which is why Salamis is seen as quite an important turning point in our history.

Which brings me to the ship that goes by the name Salamis floating outside the shores of this island of ours. It fatefully picked up a hundred migrants who were stranded at sea and then was apparently ordered by both Italian and Maltese authorities to return its fare to Libya. All forms of legalisms are out in force at the moment. Mallia and Muscat are clinging to the rules of rescue at sea – basically the intent being to feign ignorance of the fact that the people who were saved would have been potential asylum seekers.

Those dreaded NGO’s have caught on to this farce and have immediately issued a call for the migrants to be allowed to disembark. “Not on my island” quoth Mallia. “It’s a point of principle”. Really? Both Italian and Maltese authorities seem to forget that they have been busy warning their own nationals to keep a wide berth of Libya – not exactly a safe haven for whomever to be obliged to disembark to. The class of idiots that swallow the daily pill from the authorities that be have taken to swarming onto the facebook page of EU Commissioner Malmstrom – spewing out all sort of invective chief among which is “Don’t mess with Malta” or “Keep out of our country”.

Early this afternoon the opposition did little to help the cause by standing fair and square behind the Labour government’s position. It was probably not aided by the fact that there are many a similar skeleton in its cupboard – PN governments did have the habit of using poor souls at sea as bartering tools for international diplomacy.

Yes, both the PL and the PN have opted to paint our country the picture of intolerance and non-hospitality. The irony is lost on all those idiot tweeters and facebookers threatening that the Knights of Malta will fight back for their identity. Has anyone heard of the Hospitallers? Do we really need to be reminded over and over of our role as nurse and missionary of the Mediterranean? Do our politicians not see that there is no dignity to be found in blowing the nationalistic trumpet?

It seems not. It seems that the hundred plus souls on board the Salamis are bound to suffer the heat, the danger and the uncertainty. Because Mallia thinks it’s a point of principle. Because Busuttil wants to stay consistent with previous PN positions. Because Muscat still gets a hard on every time he believes he can emulate Mintoff – that most Arab of post-colonial leaders.

This time the name Salamis will not be synonymous with the saving of civilisation as we know it. It will be a great monument marking the continuing slide to our mediocre end.

 

 

Categories
Immigration

Murder they wrote

The jury seems to still be inexplicably out as to whether Joseph Muscat’s bluff about the pushback strategy was commendable or otherwise. I say inexplicably because it does not seem to me to be a matter of opinion but of fact. Yet, there are plenty who would advocate that Joseph did the right thing and that his waterfall of badly mixed clichés – from “stamping of feet” to “waking up an smelling the coffee” are the necessary ingredients to get Europe going. The sad part is that it is not only your usual set of suspects who have swallowed the Taghna Lkoll happy pills but even persons who you would expect to have a critical mind. Let’s look at some facts:

1. The ECFHR is not the EU

They keep repeating this mantra that the European Human Rights Court decision is part of some conspiracy and that we should stick two fingers up at them and send the migrants to Brussels. Idiot’s guide to the EU number 1: The Court in question is part of the Council of Europe – an organisation based in Strasbourg with 45 member states including Russia and Turkey. Not the EU then.

2. The Illegality of the act

When Muscat chose to prep the planes and get the engines of forced repatriation running he was doing so knowing that he is in full violation of European law on Human Rights. Not EU Law. Not just that. His bit of sabre-rattling actually meant he was jumping onto the world stage by threatening to do something illegal. Let me put it into perspective for the slower among you. Think Saddam Hussein using human shields to prevent US bombing of targets. Think threatening to unleash Sarin Gas on protesters. Think threatening to drive with tanks over protesters. Think shooting border crossers on sight. Yes. That kind of illegal.

Does it matter that Muscat claims to have been bluffing? Hell no it doesn’t. Imagine I walked up to you and threatened to kill you if you did not hand over your cash. Then once you hand over the cash I tell you – “Hey, I’m only bluffing, but that got you to wake up and smell the coffee”. Right? And don’t give me the “ends justifies the means” bullshit. This government has proven to be so inept at understanding the boundaries of the rule of law that it is enough to give any ordinary citizen the creeps.

3. That Muscat’s Mental

It’s not my words. It’s the gist of the international press. His “bluff” had one effect and one effect only. He is being seen as an insane nutball who is willing to resort to illegal threats to try to get what he needs. Think Ahmadinejad meets Hussein meets Bush. While you were busy harping about some trumped up “national interest” your prime minister was busy flushing our national reputation down the drains. I can’t wait to see what the Economist’s side columns will make of this.

And another thing….. it’s not about saving face with the neighbours. Our reputation abroad is important because we work in a community of nations and should bear that in mind before we torpedo it with some ridiculous tantrum.

Don’t feed the animals

It’s a sign you see most time in the zoo. Our government needs some sobering up after this fiasco caused by its not being half as clever as it imagines itself to be. Right now the last thing the government needs is applause from the inane movement that cannot be made to understand why respecting human lives and dignity is at the basis of 21st century civilisation. You cannot pick and mix which lives to respect. You cannot selectively apply dignity. Just as you should never ever think about separating the healthy for the weak in some nightmarish remake of a nazi concentration camp simply because you wanted to “stamp your feet”.

So the next time that you think of praising our “gutsy” Prime Minister think of the human shields in Iraq at the time of Hussein and ask yourself: Would I have applauded Saddam for his gutsy standing up and being counted to the American forces?

I guess you know who should be smelling the coffee now.

 

Categories
Immigration Values

Civil and uncivil society

The Muslim Brotherhood will be turning out in large numbers in Cairo on Sunday to protest the abrupt removal of what was after all a democratically elected government. The Maltese hapless clone of the British National Party will also be demonstrating in Valletta – voicing their support for what they interpret as the Prime Minister’s strong stand against Europe and in favour of the ill-fated push-back policy. These too are manifestations of civil society. The right to express one’s opinion is sacrosanct, there’s no two ways about that, and even the most abominable of ideas can be voiced – to a certain extent (let’s not forget it is not legal to incite people to commit violence or to be violent).

The freedom of expression is a victim of gross misinterpretation in Malta though – as has often been documented in this blog. All too often the right to have an opinion is confused with “being right”. Having an opinion, no matter how maladroitly it has been constructed, seems to be the one and only “right” that counts. Critics of opinions are themselves labelled as “intolerant” and it all goes rather awry when the subject is tolerance itself – as in the case of immigration. Muscat’s Labour has built a lot of mileage on the concept of “the right to have an opinion no matter how wrong” and continues to fan this twisted logic while in government.

I am not sure how pleased Muscat can be with the Sunday demonstration in his honour. He must have failed to calculate the long-term effects of his clumsy bluff. Demonstrators will be hitting the streets in Malta on Sunday practically clamouring for the PM to insist on flaunting international rules and fundamental human rights. Our modern progressive Prime Minister must not have seen that coming. Diplomatic and strategic short-sightedness is a clear trait of the Taghna Lkoll arsenal – and many seem to be finding that out now.

Which brings me to the rest of civil society. We have seen in the past few days a sort of sectorial backlash to Muscat’s proposed push-back policy (or bluff). First the lawyers, then the academics and now the authors were reported as taking a unified stand against the whole idea. To begin with there is nothing more reassuring than seeing sectors of civil society putting their money where their mouth is. I do sense though that the obsession with partisan division still sticks like a limpet with the majority of such initiatives.

It’s not a question of being a wet-blanket but if I set aside the authors’ declaration I look at the “academics” and “lawyers” joint positions and all I see is a smokescreen for a party stunt. The most blatant of the two was the 65 lawyer judicial protest.  Aside from the fact that in certain quarters suddenly lawyers became a force to be reckoned with the names on the list were not exactly an across the board petition gathered at one of the drink-holes where lawyers tend to agglomerate. “65 lawyers active directly or indirectly with the nationalist party” would have been a better label.

As for the academics and as Maltatoday put it “labour intellectuals” there was again a selective exercise going on. That common position was not circulated at the University Canteen for anyone who agrees to voluntarily append his signature. It was an exercise in “look our party allows dissidence” – which really rang foul when you put it in the perspective of the “elaborate bluff”. Why? Because if you were Joseph Muscat and you really had hoped that your bluff were called you would also need a way to distance your party and its credentials from what you knew deep down to be a nefarious position. What better way than have your token liberals and academics yell their disapproval?

The strongest messages came from an all too different milieu. Those NGOs who quit the LGBT forum clearly explaining to the hapless government that you cannot pick and mix in the world of fundamental rights. A government that has no qualms to send human beings to their doom (and separating families in the process) cannot be serious about other fundamental rights. Aditus and Drachma did the only possible thing and quit the forum. You cannot engage with a bluffer and with a government that uses rights pragmatically for vote-gathering purposes.

To conclude, the minefield of immigration policy cannot be “un-politicised”. It is as political as it can get. The discerning citizen must be able to distinguish between the genuine movements and the smokescreens set up by the parties to cover what has hitherto been a hopeless record in the field of immigration. In the post 9/11 world we have to come to terms with this realignment of civil society and bear these truths in mind while taking an active role.

Unfortunately, the genuine movements (for or against certain policies) operate in the same field as the political parties who have a strong grasp on the ultimate decision taking seats of power. The end result of such a concoction is as unpredictable as we can allow it to be.

If there is anyone who should stand up and be counted then it is that part of civil society that harbours values for values’ sake and stops thinking in the “us and them” dichotomy. It will be hard. Judging by the history of Maltese politics…. it will be nigh impossible.