|
Government is proposing to enshrine anti-abortion laws in the constitution. The proposal presented to government by the pro-life movement has won cabinet approval. Government’s argument is based on the fundamental premise that since there is consensus in the country that abortion should remain an abhorrent crime in our country, government might as well entrench it. The proposal is hailed as a national proposal in favour of life. The corollary is of course that all against this proposal are in favour of death. The high moral ground of the proposal remains protection of the weakest section of society, the unborn child. Government has sent a ministerial letter to all civil society seeking their support.
We editorially disagree with entrenching the proposal in the constitution. It would appear that this sentiment is shared by a fair number of opinion makers, some even close to the Nationalist Party.
Government’s arguments in favour are far from water-tight. Since when has total approval of a law created a need for its constitutional entrenchment?
We all agree to drive on the right side of the road but would not dream entrenching this law constitutionally. On a more serious note and using the minister’s line of logic why not also entrench constitutionally paedophilia, drug trafficking, white slavery and euthanasia? After all there is consensus on these criminal forms of behaviour too.
The proposal is unnecessary, a red herring and an attempt to distract people from discussing the bread and butter issues of concern to them. Our objection rests on the fundamental premise that it is possible to be against abortion and yet disagree with this constitutional amendment.
We certainly have no intent of campaigning for abortion yet we are perplexed why in the total absence of a pro-abortion lobby in Malta government insists on this entrenchment. We believe there is sufficient legal protection and general consensus so entrenchment is unnecessary.
There are also other compelling dissenting reasons including the realities of fast growing secularization in our society. The society out of Malta is secular and in synch with the words of the late American president John Fitzgerald Kennedy a Catholic, ‘I believe in an America where there is an absolute separation between state and church’. Indeed this was the very battle cry of the seventeenth century French revolution and is today the hallmark of all modern democracies. This embodies the European ethos of secular Europe that same club which we joined only one year ago.
When joining, the EU-Malta protocol gave the necessary guarantees about abortion not being made legal in Malta. Is this not an iron cast guarantee? The proposal totally ignores and shows careless respect to the existence of a growing number of secularists in our society. The vast majority of those who abhor abortion openly question whether it need be a part of the Constitution which belongs to all the people, including non-believers.
The Constitution is there to guarantee the rights for all, independently of creed or race. It is not the constitution of Catholics in Malta but the highest law for all the Maltese, both Catholics and non-Catholics.
The proposal amounts to silencing the issue, an attempt to simply bar discussion on this issue by simply putting it under the ‘constitutional’ carpet. Only a year after enthusiastically welcoming our entry into secular Europe we are faced with a proposal which risks creating unnecessary divisions between secular and religious Malta. Most of us thought that European membership would set the seal to controversies of a secular- religious nature.
Cabinet should rethink this political minefield it risks entering particularly with liberal minded Nationalist supporters and the more enlightened members of society irrespective of political allegiances.
It should take heed of George Borg Olivier’s secular declaration that he is both a Christian and a democrat but not a Christian Democrat. This political positioning is shared by a growing number of nationalists.
Government must rethink its stance. It risks getting lost in a legal maze too.
What is the position of a Maltese woman carrying out an abortion on the European mainland? Will she be prosecuted on her returning to Malta?
Entrenchment will in no way stop abortions being carried out both locally or on Maltese citizens in Europe. It will simply create a backlash.
Government is best advised to leave the law as it stands. It already offers sufficient guarantees.
|
