Vote yes or resign

The forthcoming vote in parliament is not about divorce but about ratifying the results of a consultative referendum, which although not legally binding carries the full weight of popular sovereignty.

Since parliamentarians are the elected representatives of the people, they are duty bound to approve a law, which respects the spirit of the referendum question. The result was clear: a 53% majority for a no fault divorce granted after four years of separation with adequate provisions on alimony. God forbid that anyone fiddles with this through amendments, which depart from the kind of divorce envisaged in the referendum question.

If MPs feel uncomfortable following the cardinal rule of democracy; respecting the electoral mandate, they can always resign and call it a day. I am not impressed by the idea that MPs are free to vote as they like as long as the law is approved. This ridicules the whole notion of “conscience”. For what’s the value of a no vote if it has no bearing on the final result? Such a calculated vote will render conscience in to a sort of fetish. And in case that too many Nationalist MPs cite problems of conscience, who is to decide which souls are to be saved or not?

For those MPs who are not willing to ratify the result, resigning will be a far more  honourable thing to do than abstaining which could be interpreted as an opportunistic vote not to alienate conservative constituents.  But while an abstention sounds pathetic, voting against the popular will is simply intolerable.

Let us not forget that the reason given by Gonzi for holding the referendum was that this was too big issue for parliamentarians to decide upon. Now that the people have decided, Gonzi should be the first to respect their decision with his vote.

For Gonzi is in even more delicate situation than other MPs. As Prime Minister he cannot hide behind the calculus of convenience being designed to pass the bill while saving the face of a theocratic fringe, which refuses to come to terms with the rules of democracy. In his case an abstention would simply indicate a lack of leadership. For it is rich on his part  to expect MPs to secure the passage of the law on which  he still refutes to say whether he will be voting yes or no.

If he votes no he would be defying the result of a referendum, which he was the first to invoke. This leaves him with two choices: vote yes or resign.