Skip to main content

Riforma Kostituzzjonali jew Theddida Kostituzzjonali?



L-idea ta’ riforma kostituzzjonali ilha diversi snin tiġi msemmija. Kienet bdiet tissemma’ fi żmien l-amministrazzjoni Nazzjonalista, b’referenza partikolari għal tibdil fis-sistema elettorali, u kienet wegħda prinċipali tal-Partit Laburista fl-elezzjoni tal-2013. Wegħda li pero’ ma sar xejn fuqha, u reġgħet deher fil-programm elettorali tal-2017.

Riforma Kostituzzjonali mhix xi ħaġa taċ-ċajt. Il-Kostituzzjoni hija l-ogħla liġi tal-pajjiż, u hija l-gwardjan fuq il-Gvern u l-Parlament, biex lanqas huma ma jkunu jistgħu jaqbżu ċertu linji u jgħaddu liġijiet li jiksru d-drittijiet ta’ individwi. Għax anke’ f’demokrazija hemm il-periklu li min ikun qed imexxi, bl-appoġġ tal-maġġoranza tal-poplu, jeħodha kontra l-minoranza, jew jikser id-dritt ta’ l-iżgħar minoranza, l-individwu. U allura, fi ftit kliem, hemm il-Kostituzzjoni biex tipproteġi lil kull wieħed u waħda minna mit-tirannija tal-maġġoranza.

Ir-riforma kostituzzjonali saret aktar kritika f’dawn l-aħħar snin għax rajna Gvern li qabeż kull linja u abbuża minn kull nuqqas li ma kinetx taħseb għalih il-Kostituzzjoni. Dan wassal għat-tmermir tal-istituzzjonijiet u l-awtoritajiet li jeżistu biex iżommu kontroll fuqu, u minflok għamel minnhom estensjoni tal-makkinarju tiegħu, makkinarju maħsub biex jipproteġi lil dawk qrib tiegħu u jżomm l-idejn tal-forzi tal-ordni u tal-ġustizzja ‘l bogħod minnhom. Kien dan li ħoloq il-kultura tal-immunità f’pajjiżna, u t-telfien tas-saltna tad-dritt, sal-punt li dawn spiċċaw temi ta’ natura urġenti fil-Parlament Ewropew u l-iskop ta’ żewġ missjonijiet mibgħuta f’Malta.

Għaldaqstant kwalunkwe’ tibdil fiha jrid ikun maħsub u meqjus biex iżid il-kontrolli fuq l-abbuż tal-poter tal-Gvern, biex dak li ġara f’dawn l-aħħar snin ma jerġa’ jiġri taħt l-ebda Gvern, Nazzjonalista jew Laburista. Iżda huwa diffiċli li tafda li dan iseħħ jekk dawn ir-riformi fil-kostituzzjoni jitmexxew minn min kien l-ewwel wieħed li abbuża min-nuqqasijiet tagħha. Qisek qed tafda kelb biex jgħasses għadma.

Nhar il-Ħadd li għadda bħal donnu Joseph Muscat reġa’ ftakar f’dawn ir-riformi kostituzzjonali. Kif jiġri s-soltu, dawn jissemmew kulmeta jsib ruħu dahru mal-ħajt u jkun irid idawwar l-aġenda. L-istorja tal-kuntratt maħmuġ li sar mal-Vitals xejn mhi tinżel tajjeb man-nies, u infatti l-fiduċja f’Muscat ħadet daqqa sew l-isfel. Allura ħass li dan hu mument tajjeb fejn jerġa’ jqajjem il-kwistjoni tar-riforma kostituzzjonali.

Ejja nifthiemu, il-Partit Nazzjonalista wkoll jemmen li hemm bżonn riforma kostituzzjonali. Infatti, fir-reshuffle li ħabbar il-Kap tal-Partit Adrian Delia, inħatar kelliem proprju fuq dan is-suġġett: Chris Said. Ċert li Chris ħa jkun qed jidħol għal dan l-inkarigu bis-serjetà u l-kompetenza li dejjem ħadem bihom.

Ir-riformi li jrid jara l-Partit Nazzjonalista imma huma riformi li jnaqqsu l-abbużi, riformi li jibnu fuq ir-rapporti li għamlu d-delegazzjonijiet tal-Parlament Ewropew. Bidliet fil-mod kif jinħatru karigi bħall-Kummissarju tal-Pulizija, separazzjoni tar-rwoli tal-Avukat Ġenerali biex ma jkollux kunflitt bejn li jkun avukat tal-Gvern u fl-istess ħin dak li jiftaħ investigazzjonijiet, poteri inkwirenti lill-Maġistratura biex tiftaħ inkjesti minn jeddha, u kontrolli fuq il-poter tal-Gvern tal-ġurnata biex ma jkunx hemm prattiċi korrotti ta’ xiri ta’ voti fl-elezzjonijiet, fost affarijiet oħra.

Muscat pero’ inkwieta lil ħafna nies b’dak li qal il-Ħadd. L-ewwelnett, ta’ x’jifhem li diġa’ hemm xi nies li qed jippreparaw tibdil Kostituzzjonali minn wara dahar kulħadd, u mhux fil-Konvenzjoni Kostituzzjonali li kellha tinkludi nies minn kull parti tal-poplu u minn kull sfera tal-ħajja biex it-tibdil jiġi minn isfel ‘il fuq. Din hi inkwetanti, għax ifisser li ħa nispiċċaw iffaċċjati bi proposti lesti, ġejjin minn min l-aktar li abbuża mill-Kostituzzjoni, minflok b’tibdil diskuss u propost mill-poplu lejn il-politiċi.

It-tieni, ta x’jifhem ukoll li jekk jara li dan it-tibdil ma jkollux mill-ewwel appoġġ wiesa’, ser imur għal referendum. Muscat jaf li jekk jagħmel referendum ħafna nies ma jivvutawx skont dan it-tibdil x’ser ikun ifisser, imma jispiċċaw fuq jivvutaw bejn min jaqbel miegħu u min ma jaqbilx. U jidher li hu għadu jemmen li l-maġġoranza jagħżlu lilu, it-tibdil li jrid hu jaqbeż il-50%, u mbagħad ikun jista’ juża’ dan il-“mandat” kontra kulmin jopponi dan it-tibdil, inkluż il-Membri Parlamentari tal-Partit Nazzjonalista. Dan huwa xenarju li rridu nkunu lesti għalih u nkunu lesti naffaċċjaw, għax jekk dan it-tibdil, kif ħafna qed jaħsbu, ser ikun intiż biex jiċċentralizza aktar il-poter f’Kastilja u jnaqqas l-iskrutinju Parlamentari u l-iskrutinju tal-istituzzjonijiet l-oħra li għandhom jikkontrollaw il-Gvern, aħna rridu nkunu l-aħħar tarka għal pajjiż ħieles u demokratiku.


Riforma Kostituzzjonali iva rriduha, u ser nagħtu sehemna fiha. Imma ħa nkunu għajnejna miftuħa li din tkun riforma li ssaħħaħ id-demokrazija, u mhux riforma li theddidha.



Dan l-artiklu deher f'In-Nazzjon tal-Erbgħa 14 ta' Frar 2018.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Who's the real monster?

I usually hate comparisons, but some very different reactions from the 'great unthinking' rabble do merit some analysis. In May this year, the notorious dog Star was found buried alive . A prima facie , this looked liked the most horrific case of animal cruelty, and is still considered so by some. The perpetrator was described by the sensitive and caring animal-lovers as a villain, a heartless monster, deserving of death, stoning, or even to be 'buried alive in the same manner'. But what did Mr. Vella actually do, according to the testimony heard in Court? Star was sick. It was shedding fur, and quite old already, and its owner did not afford the treatment. In trying to save some money from paying for the dog to be put to sleep and killed properly by vets, she gave it to Mr. Vella to have it killed himself. Nothing much to make people angry till now. Mercy-killing of very sick and suffering animals is widely done and usually acceptable. You may

Shema Yisrael, the cries of the Palestinian people

You live a peaceful life in a modest home. You've never bothered anyone and you've never caused trouble. Out of the blues, a group of people claim that they should live in your house. Why? Because they have been persecuted in a war, and they claim that some 5,000 years ago, their God had told them your home was their promised land. Somehow, the whole community agrees with their wishes, and asks you to grant them your spare-bedroom. You oblige. After a few months, they take the whole top-floor. In a few year's time, they take over your kitchen. After a few more years, they own your house and keep you and your family locked in the bathroom. They don't even allow you to get out, while they strip-search you the few times they do. Even if it's a medical emergency. Sometimes not even medical personnel and ambulances are allowed to see to your needs while your children die in your hands. Desperation starts hitting you. Life seems to offer no hopes. In moments

Why I am dropping out of the Anti-ACTA protest

Like many avid internet users, I have followed with interest the debate about ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement). After reading numerous articles, watched sensational videos, and discussed ad nauseam with friends, I have realized that what I have come across is a campaign hi-jacked by lies, myths and misconceptions as to rival Malta's misinformed divorce referendum campaign. I have to say that the videos on Youtube   got me worried. I quickly signed the petition, joined the Anti-ACTA groups, and prepared myself for a full-blown fight against the big-governments who want to intrude on our privacy and freedom of expression. Like our MEP Edward Scicluna invited us to do in the University debate last Wednesday, I did not try to understand the details of ACTA but rather saw who the players behind it were. But as usual, my logical instincts took over, and his call to not try to understand ACTA actually pushed me to read the text. And here's what I now know: ACTA is