Resignation culture still missing

By any standard this is a serious matter, and Mallia cannot claim to be entirely innocent, even if entirely exonerated by the inquiry, of any direct involvement.

Cartoon by Mark Scicluna
Cartoon by Mark Scicluna

This month’s infamous shooting incident has done more than just overshadow the budget; it has also thrown into sharp focus the lack of a local culture of political accountability.

The results of our survey today confirm that a relative majority believe that Dr Manuel Mallia’s position as National Security and Home Affairs Minister is no longer tenable in the light of the incident. But under scrutiny, this majority turns out to be a good deal less categorical than many have so far assumed. 

Naturally, it comes as no surprise to discover that the vast majority of Nationalist respondents – 82% – want Mallia shown the door. If anything, the only surprise is that the percentage is not higher. 

But while a sizeable percentage of Labour voters concur with this position, the overall result is severely dampened by a staggering 25% which has no opinion either way.

This is naturally open to interpretation, but it seems to confirm perceptions that the great upheavals and ethical questions that erupt from time to time on the political stage – and which are given so much prominence in the media – may not be felt as deeply at street level. 

The rhetoric of politicians is not always in synch with the popular mood; and while this particular issue has in a sense revitalised and invigorated the confrontational nature of Maltese politics, it is sobering to remember that a quarter of the population does not share this sense of urgency at all.   

Moreover, what the survey reveals about Labour voters may also be subject to alternative interpretations. One must bear in mind that Mallia, previously associated with the PN, is ultimately viewed as an ‘outsider’ to the party’s rank and file. It is debatable whether a similar proportion of Labour voters would support the removal of any other Cabinet Minister under similar circumstances; especially if the minister concerned was also a long-serving and loyal party foot-soldier. 

Having said this, the most significant statistic concerns the so-called ‘switchers’ – traditionally PN voters who transferred allegiance to Labour at the last election. These may form a small minority vis-a-vis the population as a whole; but as Prime Minister Joseph Muscat knows only too well, it is to this minority that he owes his government’s overwhelming majority at the last election. 

It is clear from the figures that this strategic voter segment is disillusioned by what they perceive as a straight continuation of the former administration’s way of doing politics: in this case, a knee-jerk impulse to automatically defend any minister targeted by the Opposition, regardless of popular perceptions or ethical considerations. 

The full implications of losing this sector’s support need not be spelt out here. Suffice it to say that Muscat’s handling of the Mallia affair is fraught with political dangers: defending the minister indefinitely may in the end prove too costly, even for a Prime Minister buoyed by the largest parliamentary majority in Maltese political history.

Ultimately, however, the decision should not rest solely on political/electoral considerations, or even popular perceptions. There are valid reasons for Mallia to resign; and not all of them have to do with personal responsibility for either the shooting incident, or even the subsequent cover-up, as alleged.

The first of these (and also most alien to our national culture) is the ‘not on my watch’ principle. The entire concept of political responsibility rests on this premise; politicians, having been elected to office by the public, are responsible not just for their own personal actions, but also for those of their staff…and ultimately for the failings of the areas which fall under their ministerial portfolio. 

Naturally, this reason alone may not suffice to warrant the instant removal of ministers over each and every administrative failure of their office – a strict application of this rule would practically suffocate governments, and the end result would be instability or even chaos – but in this instance there are additional considerations, including Mallia’s own decidedly amateur and bumbling approach to the matter, that come into play. 

The incident in question raised several, very serious questions – to date unanswered – regarding the chain of command in police operations, for which Mallia is directly responsible. There have been conflicting reports, contradictions between ministerial statements and eye-witness accounts, and what appears to be a total breakdown in internal  and external police communication… resulting in a serious loss of public confidence in the police force as a whole.

By any standard this is a serious matter, and Mallia cannot claim to be entirely innocent, even if entirely exonerated by the inquiry, of any direct involvement. Whether or not he personally involved himself in a cover-up is at this stage irrelevant. It was on Mallia’s watch that misleading information was released by his ministry; and by admitting that he had not seen the press release before it was issued (and taking into consideration the seriousness of what was at stake) he has also admitted to gross incompetence and negligence.

In most countries, this fact alone would warrant his removal from office. Yet in Malta, this same consideration – i.e, a ‘not on my watch’ culture of political accountability – is precisely what remains missing from the local political milieu.