Let justice take its course

The past week has once again seen the law courts turn into the centre of attention, as due to a case related to money laundering.

This is after the parish priest of Marsaxlokk, Fr Luke Seguna, was arraigned and charged with money laundering and fraud, with the police saying that he had amassed €450,000 over seven years when his total earnings over the same period were only €75,000.

Besides reporting on the court proceedings themselves, we have not yet commented on the merits of the case or the nature of the police investigation into Seguna, and we will continue to follow this course of action.

What this editorial focuses on instead is the general public reaction to the arraignment of people trusted in the community.

Over the years, when people revered by the community, who are not politicians, are arraigned, the public reaction can be largely summed up across two different categories: a group of people who are shocked that such a person was arraigned ‘because he or she did so much good for the people’ or because he or she is such an icon, and another group which greets the news by lambasting said person, saying how he or she should be helping people rather than doing some form of wrongdoing, or should not allegedly be doing such things, because of the position they hold.

Let’s start with the former line of thinking, and again here we want to make it clear that we are talking in general, and not about any specific case, where if a person does good, it does not absolve them from any wrongdoing that they may commit.

That’s a line of thinking which the Maltese suffer from: we seem to think that because a person helped people in the past, it absolves them from any illegalities that they may do.

Then there is the second group of people – a group which generally appears to be sizeably larger than the one explained above – who take extra offence when people revered within the community allegedly do wrong.

If such a person is found guilty, then they are right in their way of thinking, and if not, then they are not correct as well. But one situation does come about – when it comes to politicians, a different line of thinking does come into play, and outrage tends to be more driven by political allegiance, with many defending or remaining silent in the case that someone from their party is targeted.

Where was this collective outrage, for instance, when evidence emerged – and continues to emerge – about how the public were swindled out of three hospitals, in a deal which seemed largely intent on allegedly fattening the pockets of a few businessmen and politicians?

Where was this collective outrage, furthermore, when evidence emerged in the media of how Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi listed a company, owned by then power station director and current alleged Daphne Caruana Galizia murder mastermind, Yorgen Fenech, as one which will pay them the equivalent of €5,000 per day?

There was a public outcry, yes, but many remained silent.

The duty of politicians – just as much as any other person revered in the community – is to help people and to make their lives better. And yet we have seen so many of them in the past years being embroiled in scandal after scandal. Some of them still sit in Parliament, and people don’t seem to see a problem in that.

That’s where the incongruence lays.

In Fr Seguna’s case, may the justice system take its course – if he is guilty, then may it find him guilty, and if he is innocent, then may he be found innocent and absolved.

But in the case of Malta’s society and its line of thinking, may we learn to separate what is right from what is wrong, and may we not let our judgement or thinking be clouded by anything external from the facts.