Alfred Sant insists lack of EFSF ratification goes against the law

Former prime minister Alfred Sant has insisted the Maltese parliament’s approval of the loan to Greece and its participation in the European Financial Stability Facility is legally incorrect, because the parliament did not ratify the inter-governmental agreement between EU member states.

The former Labour leader addressed parliament today in a winding-down speech that contested a ruling by deputy Speaker Censu Galea, that said the parliamentary authorisation for more funds for Greece carried with it an implied ratification of the Eurozone agreement to loan funds to debt-ridden member states.

“It’s unprecedented that we have embarked on a procedure that is a breach of the law,” Sant said, appealing to the Speaker to take “a discrete yet direct initiative” to restore the parliamentary procedure he said had been vitiated.

“Our duty is to see this procedure restored… because there is a chance in future that even more conditions and proposals will be added to this agreement, and it would not make sense to leave their foundations weak.”

Sant is insisting that every the inter-governmental agreement on the eurozone loans has to be first ratified by parliament, before voting to authorise government to effect such loans.

But in a ruling, deputy Speaker Censu Galea said that parliament’s authorisation of the disbursement of the loans under the EFSF implied that the House was also ratifying the inter-governmental agreements.

In his contestation, Sant said he had been legally advised by two separate sources that the ruling was “totally incorrect”.

“The concept of implicit ratification as this ruling seems to be inferring is spurious and does not correspond to any provision under Maltese law.

“Ratification is not some benefit of parliament’s but a required procedure for international agreements on decisions that intrinsically affect the character of the Maltese state,” Sant told MPs.

He pointed out that despite the initial protestations from the government side, it turned out that MPs had only been provided with a draft eight-page document of the EFSF, when it turned out that subsequent amendments that were not tabled in the House had increased the volume of the document to 208 pages – such was the extent of the final document that Sant says had to be first ratified.

Sant also added that the Speaker’s ruling, in which it said the invalidity of the law could only be contested in court, was hollow because citizens pursuing such a claim in the courts had no legal standing unless they prove they would be directly affect by the law.

“I feel this situation is unacceptable in a democracy… In a time where other European parliaments – even Germany’s – are doing their utmost to safeguard their integrity and sovereignty, the least we can do is ensure we move in a straight line where our laws are concerned.”