‘Rights on paper not enough’: Maltese equality consultants defend new bill 

Newly-launched Maltese equality consultancy aequitasbridge said the Equality Bill is necessary, arguing that human rights require a structure to protect them. 

aequitasbridge, which was set up by former Human Rights Directorate head Silvan Agius and former MEP Cyrus Engerer, spoke to MaltaCEOs after lawyer Andrew Borg Cardona said that Malta's existing laws already provide robust protection against discrimination.

It said Malta's equality laws lack the institutional backing needed to make them effective, noting that EU and international bodies have repeatedly flagged the country’s lack of a National Human Rights Institution.

It pointed out that Malta is currently one of a handful of EU member states not to launch such an institution.

“Equality architecture is the discipline of building that structure properly, not simply declaring rights on paper and hoping institutions grow up around them,” aequitasbridge said. 

“Malta’s current framework is all declaration and very little architecture.”

“The Employment and Industrial Relations Act prohibits discrimination on grounds ‘not acceptable in a democratic society,’ a formula wide enough to sound comprehensive.”

“In practice it operates through industrial tribunals, on an employment only basis, with no power of independent investigation, no capacity to act on its own initiative and no shift in the burden of proof.”

“The National Commission for the Promotion of Equality has always been a promotional and advisory body, not an enforcement one. A right that exists on paper but has no accessible route to a remedy is a right in name only, and that is the gap the Bill is built to close.”

aequitasbridge praised the Bill for reversing the burden of proof, requiring the accused to demonstrate that discrimination did not occur.

“This single change is more likely to produce case law than decades of the current regime have managed, and it brings Malta into line with obligations under the Racial Equality Directive, the Employment Equality Directive and the Gender Recast Directive,” it said. 

As for concerns that a new Commission could lead to overlapping jurisdiction, aequitasbridge said this is solvable by presenting complainants with a single clear point of entry, not by having fewer institutions.

“Removing the new body rather than coordinating it with the old ones would leave Malta with the same fragmented structure that has failed complainants for years,” it said. 

“That same fragmented structure fails people who face discrimination on more than one ground at once, such as disability combined with age, or gender identity combined with nationality.”

“Existing law was built ground by ground, in isolation, because it was never designed as a single structure in the first place. The Bill’s wider list of protected characteristics and its recognition of indirect discrimination close a gap that has existed since long before this current debate, and no sectoral patchwork can close it on its own.”

As for Dr Borg Cardona’s call for more resources to be spent on equality training and education, aequitasbridge said that this cannot be seen as a substitute for the new structure.

“Malta’s record shows that training without enforcement has not changed outcomes for people facing discrimination, because the underlying architecture was never built to carry that weight.”

“Strengthening Malta’s democracy means strengthening the protection of fundamental rights, because that protection is a foundation of democracy, not an add-on to it.”

“aequitasbridge works with governments, UN institutions, equality bodies and civil society across Europe on equality architecture and governance, building the structures that turn declared rights into delivered ones.”

“Parliament should proceed with the Bill and give Malta, at last, its first National Human Rights Institution.”

Cover photo: aequitasbridge