Pyrrhic victory for Delia and Grech’s faux pas: the PN’s weaknesses exposed

Adrian Delia: A Pyrrhic victory

Adrian Delia faced an acrimonious rebellion last year by MPs who wanted him out. The rebellion eventually led to a fresh leadership contest that Delia lost. There were multiple reasons underpinning the rebellion but two issues pushed the matter over the brink. The first issue was linked to revelations that Delia had exchanged WhatsApp messages with murder suspect Yorgen Fenech when it was known that Fenech owned 17 Black but his involvement in the Daphne Caruana Galizia assassination was not yet public knowledge. The second issue was linked to accusations that Delia had conspired with Fenech to undermine David Casa’s re-election bid to the European Parliament in 2019. In July last year, Delia had filed a judicial protest against fellow MP Jason Azzopardi, accusing him of spreading false and defamatory messages that implied there were “hundreds” of WhatsApp exchanges between Delia and Fenech. But in a clamorous turn of events this week, Azzopardi agreed to a joint declaration with Delia in which he recanted on the two issues that played an important role in the former leader’s ouster.

Azzopardi declared: “… he has no reason to believe that the PN under Adrian Delia or Adrian Delia himself acted in any way or took decisions to undermine David Casa’s election as an MEP and it does not result to him that hundreds of messages were exchanged between Yorgen Fenech and Adrian Delia.”

This declaration from someone who was at the heart of the rebellion absolves Delia of two major sins he was accused of last year. It hands Delia a pyrrhic victory that strengthens his hand with the party members and leaves his supporters asking the obvious question: “Why was Delia removed in the first place if Azzopardi is now admitting that the accusations against him were not true?”

But Delia also escaped being reprimanded for his Facebook outburst against Azzopardi that triggered the whole affair. Instead, Delia received a certificate of good conduct from his arch-nemesis, who declared that the former PN leader “is not beholden to businesspersons”.

In one fell swoop, Delia’s sins – real or imagined – were absolved.

Jason Azzopardi: Swallowing words and pride

A lawyer to the Daphne Caruana Galizia family, Azzopardi has been at the forefront of the battle for justice and an ardent critic of government corruption. He formed part of the 17 rebel MPs, known as the 17 Blue Heroes, who last year rallied to get rid of Delia. Azzopardi was one of those within the party who believed Delia did not have the moral authority to lead the fight for good governance and against corruption.

In July last year, Azzopardi had reacted to a judicial protest Delia filed against him by describing the then PN leader as a “Yorgen Fenech’s friend”. The MP had insisted Delia never outright denied having communicated with Fenech.
Azzopardi had also challenged Delia to resign from parliament if proof from Fenech’s mobile phone emerges in court that communication did take place. “If no such proof emerges, I will be the one to resign,” Azzopardi had said in an acrimonious exchange on Facebook 10 months ago.

But now, Azzopardi’s volte face on Delia has left many of his followers perplexed. In the best hypothesis to justify his actions, some of Azzopardi’s supporters have gone as far as suggesting that he signed the joint declaration under duress.

Irrespective of what happened behind closed doors at PN headquarters, it appears that Azzopardi has had to swallow his words and his pride. We will only know whether he did so out of conviction or convenience in the coming weeks and months.

Bernard Grech: A faux pas

A family lawyer by profession, Bernard Grech’s primary instinct is to shun confrontation in favour of mediation. This is what he probably had in mind when calling in Delia and Azzopardi to his office for a powwow, following their Facebook spat. But Grech’s action backfired spectacularly and it was all his doing. The PN leader’s initial course of action was to call an urgent meeting of the party executive to thrash out the matter, oblivious of the media circus this would create. The problem was compounded by Grech’s failure to specify what he expected the executive to decide. An internal backlash ensued and the meeting was eventually cancelled minutes before it was slated to start after Azzopardi and Delia agreed to the joint declaration.

But the declaration itself does not appear to have Grech’s imprint on it, irrespective of his efforts to get the warring MPs together. In politics, just like in the law courts, action must not only be taken but seen to be taken. The declaration is lop-sided to favour Delia with not even a meek attempt at retracting the strong Facebook post that triggered the affair.

Grech could have used his gravitas as leader to rebuke both MPs politely in public without the need to draw in the executive. He could have then hauled them into his office and given them a stern warning and if a joint declaration was necessary it should have been him who would have guided its drafting. None of this happened and while Grech had to backtrack on holding an urgent executive meeting, he gave Delia carte blanche.

It was already ugly to have two MPs engage in a social media spat at a time when the PN is trying to appear as an alternative government and not simply an Opposition; but Grech made matters worse with his indecision. By dragging in the executive, Grech showed that he is unable to make his own decisions, putting his leadership skills into question.

The faux pas reignites the spectre of a party unable to pull together let alone govern the country with serenity and certainty. Voters will have taken note.