If Robert Abela is so ‘uncomfortable’ with that abortion verdict... why doesn’t he just change the law?

Hang on, I’m a little confused. What happened, you see, was this: last Thursday, NGO ‘Voices for Choice’ issued a press release to announce that: “a Maltese woman was brought to court after facing criminal charges that she self-managed a medical abortion at home. [...] She was today found guilty, and given a conditional discharge for three years by our courts of law.”

The heading of the PR was: “This should never have happened!”; and as one might expect, from an organisation that is eponymously ‘pro-choice’ (and which has been demanding the complete decriminalisation of abortion, ever since its inception three years ago) the rest was somewhat... shall we say, ‘scathing’:

“Today was an outrageous and painful reminder that this is not unthinkable, that it has happened, and can happen to any pregnant person who has an abortion through any means in our country...”

“If more evidence was needed that our country stands out as a pariah and a violator of women's rights, this is it: a woman was charged with a crime for something that has been acknowledged as a right and essential healthcare by practically every other modern democratic country decades ago, as well as every human rights and healthcare organisation in the world...”

“There cannot be talk of equality as long as women and persons who could get pregnant continue to be regarded by the state as incubators and second class citizens...”

“Enough is enough! Down with the Patriarchy! Uteruses of the world, UNITE AND TAKE OVER!!!”

Oh, Ok: I made that last one up myself. (And even then: just to inject a little ‘comic relief’, into what is already a rather depressing topic to actually write about...)

But you get the general idea, all the same. To the great surprise of absolutely no one at all, in the entire Universe: Malta’s pro-choice lobby was (to say the least) ‘infuriated’ at the very idea that a woman could be arrested, charged, prosecuted, and eventually convicted, over something that they themselves - quite rightly, in my own view – regard as a ‘health issue’... and not as a ‘crime’, at all.

So far, so good. And certainly, nothing to feel even remotely confused about.

No, the confusing part came later. One day later, to be precise: when the Prime Minister was interviewed at the close of the ‘State of the Nation’ conference last Friday; and at one point – unprompted by any specific question by Lou Bondi – he decided to comment directly about the above case.

These were his exact words:

“I’m the type of person who is deeply concerned about – and hurt by – social injustice. There was a case this week [...] in which a woman, a prospective mother, was convicted over abortion in our country. And funnily enough [Alla jbierek], hardly anyone even spoke up about it. Now: I have read the sentence; and when you see the specific circumstances surrounding this case... they are shocking. We are talking about a young woman who suffers from very serious mental health issues; and a medical inspection also revealed that she also bore physical injuries. She was in an abusive relationship with her partner: who was the one who reported her [to the police], when she took whatever pills she took, to end her trauma... and she was arraigned before the law-courts: which, through no fault of their own, had no option but to find her guilty.

“So what we said would never happen, has happened. Am I comfortable with this situation? No, I’m not...”

Erm... see what I mean? There’s a certain ‘similarity’, wouldn’t you say, between Robert Abela’s choice of words, in that comment... and a ‘Voice For Choice’ press release, that had only just been published the day before?

“This should never have happened!”

“What we said would never happen, has happened...!”

It’s almost as though Robert Abela was actually trying to quote the title of that PR, verbatim... but somehow, the words came out all jumbled up. And besides: even without that curious verbal assonance, it remains a fact that the Prime Minister was echoing at least the SUBSTANCE of what was said by ‘Voices For Choice’, almost to the letter.

So much so, that you could almost switch the two speakers around, entirely... and it wouldn’t make a jot of difference, at all!

“What we said would never happen, has happened...”

“Today was an outrageous and painful reminder that this [criminal prosecution for abortion] is not unthinkable, that it has happened...”

Leaving aside, of course, that the Prime Minister also seems to share the pro-choice lobby’s general sentiments, on the subject of abortion being a ‘social injustice’.

The only difference is that, where the NGO was positively ‘outraged’ by the enactment of Chapter 9, Article 243 of the Criminal Code... Robert Abela was merely ‘hurt’, and ‘saddened’.

In all other respects, however: their reactions were not just ‘similar’, but... IDENTICAL.

Uncanny, isn’t it? Especially when you also consider that the two entities we find ourselves unaccountably comparing, here – Prime Minister Robert Abela in one corner; and ‘Voices For Choice’ in the other – have never quite been ‘on the same page’ before, when it comes to their views on abortion (and the criminalisation thereof).

In fact: when I mentioned, earlier, that the pro-choice lobby had been ‘demanding the complete decriminalisation of abortion’, for years... who do you think those demands were actually directed towards, in the first place?

I’ll give you all a hint: it wasn’t ‘Allen, Sven, Kyle, Nate, Dale, Chelsea, Sabrina, Gabrielle, Marie Christine, Nicola’, or any other contestant of TVM’s ‘Love Island’. (And no, it wasn’t Ben Camille, either. More’s the pity...).

Yup, folks, you got it! it was Robert Abela, that’s who it was!  You know: the same Prime Minister who has refused to ever even so much as ‘discuss’ the decriminalisation of abortion, in all the time that NGO has been practically begging him to (and still is, by the way: that same press release actually ends with the line, “As the Voice for Choice coalition, we call on the state to decriminalise abortion now”...)

... and not only that: but the same Robert Abela has also consistently presented himself, over the years, as being a resolutely, steadfastly, ‘pro-life’ politician: i.e., the sort who is vehemently AGAINST the decriminslisation of abortion, in all scenarios (or at least: those scenarios where the mother’s health is not at risk....)

For instance: when, in January 2020 – just weeks after he became Prime Minister – Joseph Muscat suddenly popped up out of nowhere, calling on him to relax Malta’s total abortion ban... Abela’s response was to declare that: ‘If he [Muscat] wants to introduce abortion, he will find me fighting against him!’...

And when I interviewed Chris Fearne on (roughly) the same subject, last December, the very first words the Health Minister said (in any answer to the question: ‘will the latest amendment decriminalise abortion?) were: “No, absolutely not. The law that regulates abortion in this country is basically Chapter 9, Article 243 of the Criminal Code: which, in a few words, states that whoever terminates a pregnancy – for any reason, and by whatever means – is liable to a prison sentence. Doctors and specialists face up to four years imprisonment, and will lose their warrants; the mother - or anyone else who assists her - faces up to three years. That is what the law says, and we are not going to change any of it. EVERYTHING WILL REMAIN EXACTLY AS IT IS TODAY.” [My emphasis].

Got that, folks? Until last December, at least, the official policy of Robert Abela’s administration, on the subject of abortion, was to simply ‘retain the status quo’. We had a law which threatened women with imprisonment – ALL women, by the way: including the ‘young’, ‘mentally-impaired’ and ‘physically abused’ one, that Robert Abela now feels so ‘sorry’ for – for procuring an abortion... and yet, despite countless calls for the Prime Minister to actually do something, about this ‘shocking’, ‘distressing’ reality... Robert Abela simply dug his heels; and refused to ever budge even a single inch, from Malta’s ‘total abortion ban’.

So, um... can anyone out there explain to me how, exactly, the same Robert Abela who has always been so consistent, in opposing the decriminalisation of abortion in this country, would suddenly turn around, and tell us all about ‘uncomfortable’ he feels... now that the same law that he himself has defended tooth and nail, ever since becoming Prime Minister three years ago, is actually being ENACTED, for a change?

Sorry, but it just doesn’t add up. Either our Prime Minister AGREES with a law that states (to quote a member of his own Cabinet): “whoever terminates a pregnancy – for any reason, and by whatever means – is liable to a prison sentence”...

... in which case, he should feel entirely ‘comfortable’ with the criminal prosecution of that woman (actually: he should be outraged that she got off so ‘lightly’, in the end...)

Or else, our Prime Minister DISAGREES with that law; in which case...

... well, the question sort of asks itself, doesn’t it? What the bleeding hell is stopping him from actually changing that law: to remove, once and for all, what he himself now describes as a ‘social injustice’? (And so soon, too, after defining himself – without even a hint of irony, or self-deprecation - as ‘someone who is not afraid of change’, in that same interview?)

So many questions, so little time...