I know nothing

“I know nothing” can be quite an intelligent motto to carry around – particularly if it is as an expression of the Socratic paradox (scio me nescire). An appreciation of the limits of one’s knowledge is an important tool to carry about in life. Ignorance of the kind that is basically the mere absence of knowledge is a tool badly wielded. I am not sure whether feigned ignorance is any better either. At the end of the day “I know nothing” outside the comfort zone of the aforementioned Socratic paradox becomes a sort of Manuel-ish expression. Manuel as in the waiter from Barcelona.

Minister Chris Cardona and I were course colleagues and I would hate for him to fall under the category of ignorant advocates that our beloved faculty and university seem all too ready to produce nowadays. My worry is quite egoistic I admit though I am sure that Cardona’s latest flurry of denials of knowledge (a polite way of saying “proclamations of ignorance”) is probably based on the stressful nature of his post and the undeniably hard time he must be having catching up with all things commercial – what with his ever so unsuitable qualification as a lawyer.

So here he was faced by a Times’ journalist and posed with the question of whether something was not amiss with Malta Enterprise’s direct appointment of the wife of Energy Minister Mizzi to some post as an envoy for procurement of business from the Far East. Our modern day Lord MacCartney is none other than Sai Mizzi Liang the Chinese born wife of Minister Mizzi. Chris Cardona decided to faff through different phases that bordered between justification and denial:

1) I had no idea : “Don’t ask me I don’t know” was the gist, just before he proceeded to assume that ME (Malta Enterprise) needed a specialised person, that the recruitment system works in that manner and that ME picked out the person that best fitted what they deemed they needed.

2) How I think it should be done : Next Cardona gave us a lesson in opinion or “how I think it should be done”. Certain appointments should be made on the need that you have, he explains. Righto Mr. Minister but that is not legal is it? As in, it’s not why we have laws? Appointing people on the need that you feel you have is what, for want of a better word, an autocrat or a despot can do. For us mere democrats there’s boards and exams and calls for applications.

3) It’s always been like this : Inevitably this one had to be slipped in. Those nasty nationalists were apparently (or allegedly since Cardona was on a roll of assumptions there) doing the same thing in the past (really? How many Minister’s wives were appointed as envoys anywhere?). Far be it from me to look into evidence of the murky nationalist past – I don’t need to anyway. Aren’t we supposed to have a transparent and meritocratic government? Isn’t this the change they voted for? What rubbish.

4) The appointment was done in good faith: When facts fail you head for religion. We are to take the Minister’s word on the fact that he trusts that whoever made the appointment made it in good faith. Of course we do Chris. Somehow though I have a feeling it should not be working like that. Especially not with the loads a bull your government fed the people about meritocracy.

5) She is specialised: And then came the best part. Pressed for more answers by the journalist, Cardona had to answer the rather irritating question “But what is Sai Mizzi Liang specialised in?”. He starts off with a bit of mumbling about the fact that she is specialised in the “negozju” (commerce) of these nations but then cuts off suddenly and concludes: “She’s from there, she has a natural knowledge base”. So it is ignorance. Of the craziest kind. Still, you couldn’t expect anything less from a government flouting Vienna Convention rules in its appointment of diplomats. Ah the law… such a fickle thing.

To conclude I present you with a useless bit of our constitution that will soon (probably) fall redundant and be replaced by a new article entitled “On Appointment by Hunch, Good Faith and Nationality”. Enjoy it while it lasts. Ignorantia legis neminem excusat. (Subarticle 6 is particularly juicy).

Article 110 of the Constitution of Malta

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, power to make appointments to public offices and to remove and to exercise disciplinary control over persons holding or acting in any such offices shall vest in the Prime Minister, acting on therecommendation of the Public Service Commission:

Provided that the Prime Minister may, acting on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission, delegate in writing, subject to such conditions as may be specified in the instrument of delegation, any of the powers referred to in this sub-article to such public officer or other authority as may be specified in that instrument.

(2) A delegation of a power under this article –

(a) shall be without prejudice to the exercise of that power by the Prime Minister acting on the recommendation of the Public Service Commission;

(b) may authorise the public officer or other authority concerned to exercise that power either with or without reference to the Public Service Commission; and

(c) in respect of recruitment to public offices from outside the public service, shall, unless such recruitment is made after a public examination advertised in the Gazette, be exercised only through an employment service provided out of public funds which ensures that no distinction, exclusion or preference is made or given in favour or against any person by reason of his political opinion and which provides opportunity for employment solely in the best interests of the public service and of the nation generally.

(…)

(6) Recruitment for employment with any body established by the Constitution or by or under any other law, or with any partnership or other body in which the Government of Malta, or any such body as aforesaid, have a controlling interest or over which they have effective control, shall, unless such recruitment is made after a public examination duly advertised, be made through an employment service as provided in sub-article (2) of this article.