A Murder is a Murder is a Murder

Killing someone by omission is still a murder. If a nurse is responsible for giving medications to a patient and as a consequence of her failure to do so he dies, that’s murder. If a prison guard fails to ask for medical assistance for an inmate who has shown the need, and as a result of that the latter dies, that’s murder. At best, if there was no intention to kill and the deaths were the result of negligence, that’s manslaughter.

Thus when 63 out of the 72 Sub-Saharan migrants on a rickety boat died of dehydration and starvation while Malta, Italy and NATO were bickering on who had to take responsibility for rescuing them, that is at best manslaughter. There’s no way to go around it. Especially when one considers the fact that a distress signal had been sent and received. Even more so when the surviving migrants reported that a military helicopter hovered over the boat and gave them water and biscuits and indicated it would come back.

Not knowing was definitely not an excuse.

What happened is more than clear. This isn’t the first time the Maltese and Italian authorities left people on the open sea while they were playing who blinks first to impress the public back home (ara kemm ahna taff mal-klandestini!). On other occasions, either someone blinked before people had died, or there happened to be no survivors to recount the story.

This is unacceptable. The blame is simply on “Malta”, “Italy” or “NATO” as noted in the press. It is on the individuals responsible who shrugged off their duties so that they could appear tough.

If the prison guards remain playing Monopoly, forget to feed the inmates and the latter die they will be charged with murder or manslaughter. These 63 human beings have died because our so holy politicians were having fun playing “who blinks first”.

 

Do We Really Need to be Kept Here?

The first word I heard when visiting Block B in the detention centre for migrants at Safi was “Freedom”. Which, as Col Brian Gatt had informed us beforehand, is the first word any visitor hears as soon as he approaches the immigrants.

Though we didn’t visit the warehouses where the conditions are worse especially due to overcrowding, the inmates at Block B didn’t complain about the conditions they were kept in. Miles away from a one star hotel, but the atmosphere wasn’t tense. The relationship between the officers and the detainees also looked very positive, and it is clear that Col Gatt is looked at as both a person in authority as well as someone who deserves respect.

What struck me was their reaction to the amount of time they have to remain detained. I expected anger towards this aspect, and while there was a certain amount of anger, what was clear from what they said and their body language is a sense of awe. They simply couldn’t understand why they were being detained for so long (18 months).

I tried to be honest with the detainees as much as I could. I told them that we were a small political party and the only party in Malta that suggests a 6 month maximum detention period, rather than the irrational 18 months. While I promised we’ll keep on insisting on the more reasonable 6 month maximum, this wasn’t likely to change any time soon.

I also tried to explain the reason why. First of all that since they entered the country in an irregular manner they needed to be monitored. Quite reluctantly they understood this. But why for so long?

The truth is that up to a decade ago, one would barely see a black person in Malta. Unlike most other Western European countries most black people entered the country as asylum seekers, on boats, sometimes in large numbers. This created a sense of shock, not necessarily racism but while we have our fair share of racists, it was more a question of fearing what was new, things we hadn’t been exposed to before – in this case, seeing a substantial amount of black people in Malta

I tried to explain that it is this was caused automatic and long term detention. That the hysteria that was felt in the country in 2002 has decreased a lot since Maltese people now meet immigrants on a day to day basis and know them personally. Also, that detention gives the Maltese people a sense of safety that what is yet “unknown” is being closely monitored.

Some understood, others didn’t. “No one was a afraid when we saw the first white people in Nigeria”, one immigrant told me.

That is what I told them. Unfortunately, there is more.

I didn’t tell them that since 2002, Malta has seen the birth of two extreme right movement, who aside to the lunatic ramblings, also decided to contest elections (one of them Alleanza Nazzjonali has by now closed shop, the other, Imperium Evropa has actually went further extreme and intends to finish what Hitler didn’t).

In order not to cause any agitation I refrained from telling them that the only reason they were being detained for so long is that both government and opposition lack balls and are afraid that they lose some votes to the remaining extreme right party if they dare rock the boat.

That their real fear is not that black people let loose will become werewolves, but that a hallucinating neo-Nazi gathers his few, but fanatically loyal followers, tell them that the blacks were let loose to rape their women and eat their babies – and then, contest elections.

What I did tell them is that what we, the Greens are asking for is not abolishing the monitoring of people who enter Malta in an irregular manner. I explained that some time in detention (maximum 6 months) is necessary. That the monitoring should go on after the immigrant is released through regular signing at police stations and mandatory health checks.

What we are proposing is nothing more than common sense, humane and cost efficient. The only reason these people are being detained for so long is that both government and opposition lack balls.

 

Rights of a Born Foetus

Even though I agree with their cause, I must admit I never really fancied most pro-life movements. I’m not referring to their followers, most of whom are genuine believers in the value of human life, like myself but to the lobbyists.

Many times it is a movement that comes out of the religious right in the U.S, the same lobbyists that gave us George W Bush and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Lobbyists that support unfettered capitalism and ironically ally themselves with a notorious “human rights” lobbying group – the right to bear arms!

I definitely do not fancy Malta’s pro-life movement Gift Of Life, and the public figure or Paul Vincenti. The most obvious reason for this is not the U.S religious right connotations but their strategies, the latest being an attempt to put a link between divorce and abortion.

The worst thing about their strategies is that they are many times harming their cause (albeit non-intentionally) – preventing abortion from entering Malta. Abortion is a taboo subject in this country. No serious organisation is lobbying for it and the only people contesting elections who have abortion on their agenda are not political parties but freak independent candidates like Norman Lowell, Emmy Bezzina, and John Zammit. What Gift of Life are doing is putting the abortion issue on the discussion table. Thanks to them (much more than the freak candidates) abortion is now being discussed. A step forward from being just a taboo subject. Though the absolute majority of us (87% according to GoL surveys) are against it, now we started to talk about it, rather than disregard the subject completely. It’s like having Birdlife putting up a fight in a country where hunting is illegal and there is no serious lobbying group that wants to introduce it. Fighting what? Windmills?

Having said that, what I really don’t like in this movement is that it is completely inconsistent. I’m referring specifically to their sheer silence when it comes to the right to life of refugees.

We are right now witnessing serious human tragedies a few miles away from our shores. People, many times fleeing death itself (something that those of us who’ve worked with refugees have no doubt about) drowning in the sea, or (in the recent past) being refused their right to seek asylum and sent back to the claws of murderers and torturers like Gaddafi.

Yet, from this pro-life movement, complete silence – even when the leader of the opposition voices words that can put in jeopardy the life of these human beings.

This movement’s symbol is 9+. Yet the impression they give is that while life starts from conception, it ends at birth. Maybe it will only touch these people if they remember that the refugee they are ignoring had once been a foetus. And that now that the foetus is born, it is still a human being that deserves, amongst other things – to live.

P.S: I want to make it clear that I’m criticizing this pro-life (and most others as mentioned above) lobbying group not pro-lifers. I have met a lot of people who are strongly pro life when it comes to the unborn child who are equally concerned and vocal about the right to life of refugees.

While this group intersects many times with the Catholic church, I am also not attributing this inconsistency to the church. A lot of people in the church have voiced their concern on the life of refugees. Not only the Jesuits, Fr Mark Montebello, the Archbishop of Gozo and other public figures but also a large number of lesser known priests and other people within the hierarchy of the Catholic church.

 

The Libyan Revolution and Maltese National Pride

National Pride has different meanings for different people. It can be healthy – supporting your country’s football team or feeling pleased when a co-national makes a groundbreaking scientific discovery. It can be sick – idealizing your culture no matter what (As if I can ever feel proud we fight in the village festa). It can also be destructive, especially when one discriminates on people coming from a different country or have a different ethnicity.

Discussions between Maltese people on the Libyan revolution be it on a bus-stop, at the pub and most of all on the Internet are demonstrating a lot of healthy Maltese pride.

Sure, some people are in panic. This is very close to Malta, co-nationals find themselves in Libya, some in risky situations, and a large amount of asylum seekers are to be expected. Even worse, the man still in power in Libya is utterly crazy. A crazy man with not much more to lose – a deadly combination. One of the risks of this is that he may bomb oil rigs (something which he has already threatening), creating a natural disaster in the Mediterranean.

However, talk between Maltese people isn’t just about the consequences we may face and our (many times realistic though sometimes inflated) fears but also a deep desire to do something to stop the massacre. As well as solidarity with people at present in our country who have friends and relatives being butchered or living in terror in Libya.

Many options are being considered. In spite of the fears (the mad-dog might want to retaliate in some way), most Maltese are demanding sanctions on Gaddafi and that we refuse to send him back the jets of two defectors – which he might use again on innocent people. Democracy in Libya and the whole region is also being discussed a lot, not only because we will benefit from it personally but also because we believe in it and would like others to have it.

Obviously such things are not the concern of everyone. Negative traits of some Maltese are coming out. One of the most disgusting is that for some this has become a pointing fingers at “the other party” be it PN or PL with the your-leaders-are-better-friends-of the-tyrant-than-mine attitude. The pathetic attitude of tribal way of seeing politics some of us have.

However, I honestly believe this country has moved on a lot these past two decades. Gone are the days when we say “bhal ta barra” when we see a successful Maltese musician on television. We are believing, more than ever that we can and do have voice in the international community, even if we’re a tiny island.

This kind of pride is healthy, very healthy.

 

Flaunting Christianity

In this article I will be not be criticizing the Catholic church. I did when I felt so, but on the issues presented below this would be highly unfair. I’ve accused the Catholic church (as an institution) on many things, including for being oppressive such as when it comes to the attitude towards homosexuals. However something it does not deserve to be called is inconsistent.

This does not mean that a substantial number of so called Catholics are not inconsistent and hypocritical.

Lately two rights related things have been at the forefront of local news – the right to divorce and the right to seek asylum for refugees or potential refugees. The institution of the church is against the first but in favour of the second.

I think the church is consistent in the sense that in its interpretation of the Bible and the words of Christ it feels divorce should not be a right, and that the right to life (of asylum seekers in this case) is sacred.

However, as one can see on most local media, the right to life not being respected by many so called Catholics, the same ones who vehemently oppose divorce and the rights of homosexuals. The variety of these hypocrites is wide ranging – from high ranking politicians up to nauseating fanatics posting comments on online newspapers.

A couple of days ago 55 Somali nationals were saved by the armed forces. 28 were kept in Malta (a democratic country that has signed the 1951 Geneva convention) while another 27 were sent to Libya where human rights are anything but respected. However, when were told they left voluntarily this raised eyebrows to those who believe in human rights and organisations such as the UNHCR and JRS (the latter being a part of the Catholic institution itself). Rightly so. The lucky migrants who were on the same boat and made it to Malta denied their friends went voluntarily in Libya. A little knowledge about Libya as well as common sense, proves them right.

Apart from the extreme (and violent) racism many Libyans have against black people, immigrants are also denied their rights by the government and Libyan institutions. Many people were arrested without charge and tortured in Libyan prisons, which have nothing to do with our prisons. Neither do the Courts of Law. Getting out of prison hasn’t anything to do with being innocent. One can only get out by escaping or bribing officials. The amount of people rotting in Libyan jails, tortured or murdered will never be known. Libya is not accountable to anyone.
Yet, what do we get from most of the same Catholics who not only oppose divorce and rights towards homosexuals, but also go berserk if a Christian symbol such as the crucifix might not be visible in public spaces? Silence.

Where is Dr Adrian Vassallo who is ready to riot to save Catholic values? Is he only concerned with the evil of pornography? Isn’t the life of human beings on his agenda? Doesn’t allowing people to be kept in inhumane conditions come into conflict with his Catholic values?

Ok, let’s leave the freak alone. Where are the pseudo-Catholic politicians who are vehemently against divorce because of their faith? Those who solidly supported the Italian government’s appeal for the right to keep crucifixes in public places? Why are they silent on an issue that can be of life and death for some people?

Above all, why is the Prime Minister denying all claims by the UNHCR and JRS and stubbornly refusing to open an inquiry on what really happened at sea, so that maybe such abuses will not take place again?

Is this what Christianity has become in our country? Waving flags to the pope (who condemned such deportation of asylum seekers himself), flaunting the crucifix and hating homosexuals? Only to put it aside when it’s not convenient?