An analytical approach towards Malta’s constitutional history, 1947-1987

Abstract

The leaders of the Maltese people who had fought against the French Republican occupying forces voluntarily placed their loyalty to the British Sovereign in 1802 on condition that their ancient rights to self-determination, individual freedom and self government be guaranteed. These claims were hard to come by since progressively, the British considered Malta as an island-fortress colony and constitutional rights were subservient to the exigencies of their Empire and their military. It was only in 1921 that very limited self-government was granted, only to be revoked and revived time and again until Independence was granted in 1964. The present work endeavours to trace the constitutional development of the various institutions of state and other constitutional features and aspects in an analytical way, each one throughout the six different constitutions in force in Malta since the Second World War. The three major institutions of state, that is, the legislature, executive and judiciary are discussed first in Chapters 1 and 2, with the overarching theme being whether, and to what measure the separation of power had been obtained by the successive constitutions. The other features of state, such as the dyarchical system and related reserved matters, citizenship, national symbols, religion, freedom of the individual, principles, franchise, the electoral system, language, the public service commission, the police force, finance and audit, and broadcasting are similarly discussed in Chapters 4 and 5 in this succession. The dissertation does not aim at giving a thorough and detailed account of the controversial political problems and issues relating to each institution or feature of state. Such work would necessitate volumes. It discusses the issues pertaining to each one of the abovementioned institutions and features of state in as far as they are consequent, or necessitated an amendment, to Malta’s constitution. An overview of the most relevant works that discussed Malta’s constitutional development is featured in Chapter 1. It is hoped that this analytical approach, when contrasted to the more traditional chronological method used by standard constitutional histories of Malta, be appreciated as an original effort.