Constitutional ruling confirms Iva's 'misleading campaign' - Zwieg Bla Divorzju

Moviment Zwieg bla Divorzju said the ruling of the Constitutional Court has confirmed “the misleading campaign the movement in favour of divorce has embarked on".

In its ruling today, the Constitutional court ruled that the Moviment Iva ghad-Divorzju had needed Mgr Charles Vella’s permission to broadcast his comments.

“The pro divorce movement, abusively, tried to portray Mgr Vella to be in favour of divorce and it then tried to say that its fundamental rights as a campaigning movement had been breached by the Broadcasting Authority.”

It added that the movements “notes with satisfaction that the Maltese Courts were not victimised by the deceit of the movement in favour of divorce without movement.”

Movement chairperson Andre Camilleri claimed the pro divorce movement “have continuously tried to mislead the public. Such attitude is unacceptable in a democratic society.”

Camilleri then appealed to everyone “to vote against a divorce without reason and say ‘No’ to the movement in favour of divorce who tried to mislead everyone.”

More in Divorce Referendum
avatar
@ P Vincenti - whoever told you that a woman wants to live with a man who wants to change her for a younger woman. I am middle aged, I am not as attractive as I was 20 years ago, but I would not want to hold on to my husband if he wanted to leave me for another woman. If after 30 years of marriage a man wants to give everything up for a younger woman, who most probably is out for what she can get, he doesn't deserve to be loved and respected by his wife. Mr Vincenti your words show you for a chauvinist, thank God my husband is not like you, because if he thinks like you do, I'm sure he would have lost my respect a long time ago. By the way I am in a normally happy marriage and neither my husband nor I are considering divorce, although we will both vote yes, to give others whose marriage has failed a chance to have a happy marriage if they wish it.
avatar
Imma kif ma tisthux tghidu li tal-IVA jridu iqarqu meta kull ma ghamlu kien li gabu dak li kien qal Dun Charles Vella fil-programm Bla Agenda. Qatt ma qalu li Dun Charles Vella qal li hu kien favur id-divorzju,pero hu kien qal li id-divorzju ma jkissirx iz-zwieg u li ghandu jkun hemm separazzjoni bejn Stat u Knisja. Allura fejn kien il qerq? Il-qerq sar kollu min dawk li qed jopponu id-dhul ta' din il-ligi,meta qalu li hu divorzju bla raguni,ghax anke hawn riedu jqarqu ghax bhal ma zgur jafu li No fault devorce tfisser divorzju minghajr tort,u dan ghar-raguni li ta min hu it-tort diga ikun hareg fis-separazzjoni. Raguni hija Reason filwaqt li Tort hija Foult. Allura min qed iqarraq sijuri tal-LE? Din hija il-fiducja li ghandkhom fil-fidi taghkom li tibzghu li jekk ikun hawn din il-ligi tistghu tirrikorru ghaliha. Daqshekk ghandkhom fiducja fis-sahha morali tal-familji maltin. Tkunux aktar ipokriti. Tindahlux fil-hajja ta' haddiehor. Tkunux dittaturi.
avatar
Submitted on Mon, 05/23/2011 - 19:06. Will women be worse off with Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando’s divorce Bill? I believe they will. The divorce law will force a woman into a divorce that she may not even want. It will allow a married man to divorce his wife, possibly in exchange for a younger, more attractive woman. He will be able to just walk out on his marriage and family to get a divorce – no questions asked. I have never heard of anyone being allowed to negate on a legal contract without incurring penalties. Not until Dr Pullicino Orlando presented his no-fault divorce law that is wholly geared against women. A divorced man may choose to remarry and have another child. Provided that he is able to demonstrate that he cannot financially support his new family and at the same time pay maintenance in respect of his first marriage, he may quite possibly apply to the courts to request that he stops any child maintenance allocated to his first wife and children. This is a travesty. The divorce movement claim that a battered woman should be given a second chance. Who in their right mind wants a woman to undergo such abuse anyway? Of course, the wife-beater was kept conveniently out of sight in their billboard that depicted the grim looking woman with a black eye. The truth is that the wife-beater will also be set free with divorce. Freed to remarry and in all likelihood continue to abuse another wife. How then did divorce solve the issue of wife beating? Simply, it did not solve anything. It just shifted the problem onto another woman. The proposed divorce law is perfectly crafted to suit men with the divorced women of Malta and their children becoming poorer and even more dependent on men. This is of course the worst possible kind of divorce as it favours one sex over the other and the siblings of the second marriage over those of the first. This divorce law will create a subgroup, a new minority class of divorced women and their fatherless children. The anti-family movement have gone to enormous lengths to disguise the implications of this law by reframing it and calling it “responsible”. I feel that the women of Malta deserve far better than a divorce law that places them at a disadvantage to men
avatar
@Just Ray The Catholic Church has nothing to do with divorce. You seem to be prejudiced against the Church. The Dark Ages will not come whoever wins. And for your information in the dark ages many countries had divorce legislation so it has nothingto do with it.
avatar
THEM GOOD THING IS THAT EVERY ONE KNOWS ABOUT IT NOW AND YOU CANNOT HIDE IT ANY MORE! . HE SAID IT - AND IT IS THERE ON RECORD. . A YES ON SATURDAY MEANS MORE FREEDOM FROM THE DARK AGES OF THE CHATOLIC CHURCH
avatar
I do not understand what the No movement is trying to say with this statement. Do they mean that Mgr Vella did not say what he said publicly on TV? Cause thousands of Maltese could vouch for this. Was his statement taken out of context? Not really, he made it clear that he was not afraid of divorce and that the solution to having "healthy" families lies in the preparation and the support that entities such as the Government, the Church and others could provide. I do not see any fault in his statement. Where has the Yes movement resorted to a misleading campaign here? It actually benefits the No movement that Mgr Vella's statement is not aired publicly, in that it bluntly shows, what the Church and Government should have done, rather then resorting to opposing and disrupting the democratic process of the referendum.
avatar
Constitutional ruling confirms only one thing---We living in a dictatorial state! bye bye democracy...Malta is flushed down a toilet!!!
avatar
Read this to see who is really misleading and playing dirty in this referendum. https://mazzun.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/il-pastorali-ta’-l-isqfijiet-it-tieni-parti/
avatar
anyone wants to bet ? the first time someone contests this again, and someoe will surely due during the next election campaign, the verdict iether at the first instance or in the appeal stage will be overturned. Who does the learned magistrate think he's kidding ?
avatar
Joseph Sant
Everyone and his brother knows exactly what Fr Charles Vella said. He did not mince his words. He was honest enough to make the clear distinction between church and state: Libero stato, libera chiesa. He emphatically stated that divorce does not harm the Christian marriage because it is education and good upbringing that forms strong families. No amount of whining from Andre Camilleri is going to change that.