Do by All Means Speak Ill of the Dead If They Were Influential in Life

In his opinion piece “Malta’s Gift to Europe,” Ranier Fsadni crosses the line between commentary and defamation. Beneath his sarcasm lies a clear intention to tarnish my name and mislead readers about my actions and my role.

 

I have never broken any law, acted on behalf of the Government or interfered with anyone’s right to expression.

 

 

 

 

 

Mr Fsadni’s insinuations that I am a “petty vandal” or that I “defy court sentences” are false and malicious

.

The Great Siege Monument is a national monument protected by heritage laws. My actions have always aimed to preserve its dignity, not erase anyone’s memory. For eight long years, the Defnisti have treated it as their private billboard. Cleaning and protecting the Monument is our duty as citizens and is an act of respect towards our national heritage. Far from vandalism.

 

 

 

 

 

On Judicial Consistency

 

In a move that many observers view as deeply questionable, the ruling delivered by Judge Zammit McKeon effectively opened the door to chaos in the protection of national monuments.

 

By interpreting freedom of expression so broadly as to allow a permanent protest site at the Great Siege Monument, the judgment created what can only be described as a law-of-the-jungle situation.

 

 

 

 

If one group of activists can continually place placards and objects there, then logically every citizen should enjoy the same right, including the right to remove them. Such a precedent risks eroding both the authority of heritage protection laws and public respect towards national symbols.

 

Even if every criticism Daphne Caruana Galizia made against Labour was true, that still would not justify a monument.

 

No democratic nation honours someone who evaded taxes, accused of domestic violence, manipulated institutions, and lived above the law.

 

 

The real menace to the rule of law is not the Labour Government, but Judge McKeon’s skewed, puppet like rulings that threaten to unravel the very fabric of impartial justice.

 

 

On the Question of Misconduct

 

Mr Fsadni accused me of “crossing the line” by referring to Daphne Caruana Galizia as a tax evader.

 

In doing so, he conveniently ignores that this description is based on information previously reported by the Maltese press. MaltaToday, on 2 December 2014, detailed tax-related proceedings drawn from public records.

 

 

 

Citing such information is not defamation; it is referencing facts already in the public domain. My remarks did not invent anything new, nor did they pass judgment, but merely pointed to what was already documented.

 

 

 

 

We Condemn How She Died — But Also How She Lived

 

This site has always condemned the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. I will never celebrate death, and will always condemn murder.

 

But Daphne Caruana Galizia lived before she died. Her public life and writings were marked by sustained personal hostility and a style that normalised psychological aggression. Her conduct was the subject of multiple court proceedings over the years. These facts form part of her public legacy.

 

Therefore, just as we condemn the way she was killed, we also condemn the way she lived publicly and the damage she caused.

 

Those who judge only the manner of her death while ignoring her public record, draw an incomplete conclusion, because morality cannot begin at death. It must include life itself.

 

The Maltese people understand this distinction. Many condemn the brutal killing, yet reject the example set by her conduct and commentary. That is why a state monument in her honour was never warranted.

 

Keeping in mind also Daphne Caruana Galizia had shattered the unity of the Nationalist Party both during her tumultuous life and even more so following her tragic demise.

 

 

 

Accused of Domestic Violence and Emotional Abuse

 

There is a saying: “Do not speak ill of the dead.” But when the dead were influential in shaping society, when their words and attitudes poisoned public life, silence is not a virtue. It is complicity.

 

Equally disturbing is Daphne Caruana Galizia’s record of domestic violence and psychological abuse against her husband, Peter Caruana Galizia.

 

 

On 8 December 2009, Mr Caruana Galizia reported at the Mosta Police Station that his wife had thrown glass plates at him during an altercation in their Bidnija residence, leaving visible injuries on his forehead.

 

Following the report, Mrs Caruana Galizia initially refused to cooperate with law enforcement, terminating two calls from officers seeking her response. She eventually appeared at the police station at approximately 7:15 p.m. that evening.

 

Despite the seriousness of the allegations and visible injury, no immediate arrest or judicial proceedings were initiated. Under today’s laws, such an incident would typically necessitate urgent police action and protection for the victim. Instead, Mrs Caruana Galizia reportedly requested a copy of the report and argued that the police should not have intervened in what she deemed a private matter.

 

The incident was later followed by an email she sent to her husban, a chilling example of coercive manipulation and intimidation.

 

On my site, I exclusively revealed the content of this email. Its publication served an important public interest function, providing direct information into the private correspondence that corroborated the earlier police report. The message was not one of affection or reconciliation; it was a calculated attempt at control, exposing a pattern of emotional domination consistent with the previous account of physical aggression.

 

That email revealed a person capable of physical violence and emotional blackmail.

 

 

 

Truly, do by all means speak ill of the dead if they were influential in life. By speaking the truth about Daphne, we will be exposing the roots of a culture of hate that continues to stain Malta to this day.

 

To honour such a person with a monument or in the European Parliament is to dishonour the victims of domestic abuse across Europe.

Mr Fsadni’s attempt to twist these facts into a mockery of democracy exposes the double standards of those who preach free speech but ridicule anyone who speaks outside their political echo chamber. His column does not defend democracy; it cheapens it through sarcasm and distortion.

 

 

 

 

I carry out my public duties with integrity and respect for the law.

 

I will not apologise for speaking openly, nor for defending Malta’s national symbols from abuse.

 

And I will continue to defend without fear, and without being intimidated by intellectual bullying disguised as journalism.

 

Viva l- Libertà tal-Espressjoni

 

Viva Malta 🇲🇹