Deciphering a tragicomedy

I guess the most logical thing would be for me to say nothing on the Wenzu Mintoff saga. I would bite my tongue if I did not pen an opinion every week and have done so for the last 37 odd years. 

When I learnt what had happened, I was struck by a deeply cold shiver. A déjà vu taking me back to the hours and days that I spent by Wenzu Mintoff as his confidante and very close friend. The passage of time eventually took us in different directions and today we are only acquaintances, no longer friends.

I knew Wenzu Mintoff since the early 1980s when as a young socialist in the Għaqda Żgħażagħ Soċjalisti, he, together with Toni Abela, spoke out against the thuggery of some notorious and well-known Labour thugs, captained by Lorry Sant, a Labour politician who will be remembered for his violence and corruption.

In 1985, the first environmental protest organised by me and others in Valletta was attacked brutally. Wenzu Mintoff and Toni Abela had the gall to speak up and for doing that they were ostracised by the same political party they militated in.

Some five years later I personally brought together a band of angry but intelligent idealists to form Alternattiva Demokratika. By that time Wenzu Mintoff together with Toni Abela had been expelled from the Labour Party. They were expelled by the same board of discipline that they had pushed for. Ironically, among the people who sat on that board are today’s dissidents—Evarist Bartolo and Sammy Meilaq, who both feel the PL has astrayed from its roots.

I spent the next nine years of my life trying to believe that third party politics was possible.  Wenzu Mintoff was to me and many others a beacon when it came to understanding and exercising political principles inspired by socialist beliefs. He was principled and his vast political knowledge motivated and strengthened his arguments and deliberations.

In those nine years I supported and encouraged Wenzu Mintoff even though I knew that he lacked the charisma and team spirit to take us to the next level. I was loyal like no other. 

I cannot say it was reciprocated later in life.

When I left politics, it was partly because I could not take the personal pressures anymore. 

I had sacrificed everything; my career, my personal life and my money to work for this ideal.  I had also suffered from the toxicity of the Nationalist administration of the day that demonised Alternattiva and its militants and the vitriol of a Labour Party that despised us for uncovering the corruption of the 1980s. I struggled with the task of keeping together many of what I now see as ‘entitled’ personalities, as a team. I had to live with the endless tantrums that dominated the inner circle of the Greens. When Mintoff left the Greens again and returned to the Labour fold we saw less and less of each other. And more so, when Wenzu decided to hang around Manuel Cuschieri, one of Labour’s more unpleasant characters.

When Mintoff was appointed by Prime Minister Joseph Muscat as judge he transformed overnight and stopped all social contact with most of his former friends. I was top of the list.  I did not complain, I respected his decision.

Mintoff is ambitious, very intelligent and well-informed, but he also has a streak that is very Mintoffian—unpredictable. Over the years we kept little or no contact but the straw that broke the camel’s back was a book review of Fr Mark Montebello’s biography of Dom Mintoff that appeared in MaltaToday. It was not written by me but from the vibes that came my way it was very clear that he expected me to put my foot down and block the publication.

That hurt but not as much as when he decided not to recuse himself when he had my court cases in his courtroom. It got messier when he decided against me and his judgements came with loaded comments in my regard.

In his last two years, many of Mintoff’s court judgments were manna for the press. They were interspersed with hyperbole against the Labour government. They were applauded by the Opposition and those who had despised him in his former days and left many of those who militated in Labour bewildered. 

Mintoff has always been a complex person. It was no secret that he wanted the job of chief justice at all costs, and I am sure that he would have done a great job. But I cannot understand why he did not realise that he would never have been the choice of Robert Abela. 

For years, the Abela family was never seen in good light, mostly because of George Abela’s actions during the Alfred Sant administration between 1996 and 1998.  Some people have short memories but Robert Abela and Wenzu Mintoff do not.

As a politically appointed judge with a history in Labour politics, Wenzu Mintoff should have known better.  Writing a letter which was bound to leak, was his way of telling it as it is. It explains everything about his thinking process. The letter was also his swan song.

It was a mistake for Robert Abela to meet him. And it is a mistake for the Prime Minister to believe that a meeting can solve everything. It was bigger mistake that Wenzu Mintoff wrote a letter revealing all to third parties. 

There is little doubt in my mind that this episode will embolden the Labour hard core and reawaken some old wounds. I am not too sure what it will do to the wider audience, though.

All I know is that the situation is very sad. Here is a man, a judge, who in spite of all my prejudices has a great mind and who has shown incredible wisdom in his court judgments. 

It is also very sad that the whole nomination process for the chief Justice has transformed itself into such a tragic comedy with names which have no chance in hell being leaked to ‘friendly’ media.

It tells us that a two-thirds majority vote to choose a chief justice works when serenity and trust are predominant in people’s hearts and minds.

That I am afraid is not the case.