Speaker Anglu Farrugia has been elected president of an obscure, pompously named Committee to Promote Respect for International Humanitarian Law of the Interparliamentary Union (IPU).
The Speaker’s comments were equally pompous: “It’s an honour to chair this committee, and I’m committed to advancing the shared values of humanity, dignity and respect for international law’.
His announcement coincided with the 7th anniversary of Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination. She would have been twitching with fury that the incoherent, spineless Farrugia was given this undeserved acknowledgement, insignificant though it may be.
She must be turning in her grave at the revolting thought that Farrugia is heading any committee, least of all one meant to stand for democracy, democratic governance, institutions and values.
The IPU’s website declares, “We want a world where every voice counts.” Why did they appoint Anglu Farrugia, a government party stooge who’s done everything possible to stifle dissenting voices?
Farrugia is the antithesis of democracy. He’s a hindrance to democratic governance. He works tirelessly to ensure only one voice counts — the voice of the party that made him Speaker despite his manifest unfitness for the role.
Daphne had written that he had forced her, as a 19-year-old girl, “to sign a false confession which he himself had written, telling her that if she did not do so, she would be returned to the pitch-black cell, with faeces-smeared walls and a metal bucket for a lavatory, where she had been kept for the past 27 hours.”
When he kicked PN MP Karol Aquilina out of parliament, He couldn’t even articulate the word “comportment” (komportament). The man can’t even speak, and he’s been Speaker of the House for an unprecedented third term.
Aquilina was objecting to another of the Speaker’s obscene decisions. Farrugia manoeuvred to prevent the Opposition from calling for a public inquiry into Jean-Paul Sofia’s death. Farrugia was protecting Labour and the prime minister who appointed him.
Farrugia wasn’t allowing “every voice to count”. He was making sure the Opposition was throttled. That’s his role – to shield Labour from embarrassment, to prevent the Opposition from exposing the truth, to stop public inquiries and debates.
More bizarrely, Farrugia ruled that a question about the former prime minister’s chief of staff, Keith Schembri, over his suspicious proximity to Pilatus Bank chairman Ali Sadr Hasheminejad was not in the public interest, rejecting the Opposition member’s question, shielding Joseph Muscat.
He rejected another two parliamentary questions about the publication of the Egrant inquiry. He stopped the Opposition from querying why Minister Owen Bonnici had a copy while the Opposition didn’t. In his infinite wisdom or endless sycophancy, he decided questions about Egrant were “not relevant in parliament”.
When the courts ruled former Police Commissioner Lawrence Cutajar should be investigated for leaking sensitive information to the middleman in the Caruana Galizia assassination, the Opposition presented a motion for a debate. Farrugia rejected it.
He didn’t want Labour to have to explain how Joseph Muscat’s Police Commissioner was secretly aiding the assassination middleman. Farrugia’s excuse was that the debate “may prejudice the right of the individual”.
When the shocking WhatsApp messages between former Justice Minister Edward Zammit Lewis and Yorgen Fenech were leaked, Farrugia denied the Opposition’s request to convene parliament to discuss a no-confidence motion in the minister. Farrugia claimed, “The details reported have been in the public domain for many months”. Those chats had only just been revealed.
When Joseph Muscat was found guilty of abusing his power by giving Konrad Mizzi an obscene €80,000 MTA consultancy, Farrugia refused to summon Muscat to answer for his actions.
Farrugia attacked the Standards Commissioner at the behest of MPs Byron Camilleri and Edward Zammit Lewis, accusing him of conducting an investigation he shouldn’t have. The Commissioner found Joseph Muscat breached ethics when he locked up journalists in Castille. Instead of denouncing Muscat and protecting journalists, Farrugia attacked the Commissioner, accusing him of going beyond his legal remit.
Farrugia even prevented a debate on the shocking Vitals/Steward Hospital inquiry conclusions. Farrugia blocked a debate on the massive scandal to protect Joseph Muscat, Robert Abela and the rest involved: “Debate on the inquiry at this stage could prejudice the human rights of possible suspects”.
Farrugia blocked a debate on Edward Scicluna’s refusal to step down as Central Bank Governor when charged with serious crimes last May. This prevented scrutiny of Labour’s former finance minister on the pretext that “debate risked prejudicing ongoing criminal cases”.
The man has no idea of what democracy is. When Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev stole the election, claiming an 85% majority, Farrugia concluded those elections were ‘fair, democratic and transparent”. He must have missed what Amnesty International had said: “Harassment, intimidation, ill-treatment, arbitrary arrests, fabricated charges and unfair trials” and a “downward spiral of oppression”.
“The persecution is so widespread and frequent it’s difficult to assess just how bad the situation really is,” Amnesty reported.
OSCE noted “widespread irregularities, including ballot-box stuffing and…. fraudulent counting”.
But an Azerbaijani-funded lobby group paid for Farrugia’s Baku trip, so he closed his eyes to Aliyev’s shocking abuse. There was nothing democratic about that election, yet Farrugia told his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ogtay Asadov: “Your election process was held in a democratic manner.”
Farrugia even blocked an urgent parliamentary debate on Daphne’s assassination when Keith Schembri was arrested in connection with the case.
Farrugia rejected a request to name a parliamentary hall after her because he claimed it would risk “eroding the impartiality of parliament”.
There is nothing Anglu Farrugia wouldn’t do if you paid for his Azerbaijani holiday or allowed him to keep his perks as Speaker. But that’s hardly the person you need to Chair an international committee that protects democracy and human rights.
Absolutely brilliant! Speaker denuded like never before, bringing out what he truly epitomises…
The guy is so incompetent, and probably so corrupted, that he would probably accept brown envelops to do his actual job. As an actual speaker.
Post this article to the committee that made the choice and then post their reply… if you even receive a reply.
Very eloquent. But one word would have been sufficient: unfit.
Sometimes I wonder how such people feel when they walk down the street.
They must know that others see them as corrupt, unsocial people who live at the expense of others.
It’s kind of amazing how they still dare to do it.
Do they even think that other people are proud of being cheated by them?
Mafia.
Actually it’s not a problem they face. Firstly, one needs to (mistakenly) assume they have any or enough of awareness to know that they are incompetent, corrupt and a weight around society’s neck. Secondly, they are so imbued with the manichaean duopoly of red and blue (where anything said against red is discounted a priori as a lie manufactured by the blue) that they do not consider any criticism as potentially legitimate.
That’s how they found it so easy to walk down and up ‘Republic Street’ without feeling they need to be hanging their head in shame.
A mentally challenged ex plod, who still has the thinking capacity he had way back then. No fit for a democratic parliament. ( I personally would not call it that)
Speaker Farrugia has a political knife at his back and has to obey orders.
This is another one who signed of his soul to Muscat , after his famous metaphorical political knifing by Muscat. Farrugia should be exposed Internationally for what he is, the Government’s Parlamentary Henchman.
Ubiquitous need I say more?