In a Facebook post published earlier today MEP Miriam Dalli reiterates her position on Amendment 52.
While Ms Dalli’s post addresses every EU country’s requirement to comply with its international obligations it still does not address the fact that this very amendment, should it have been approved, would have effectively made Malta a landing port in the Mediterranean when the country is combating a pandemic with all the burdens that this entails. The obligations that Ms Dalli mentions in her response are the same obligations that the Maltese government is rejecting in these circumstances and which two other PL MEPs abstained upon and another PL MEP voted against. With Ms Dalli’s reasoning, does this mean that the other PL MEPs through their voting stance “intend in any way to cast a shadow on the country’s name as it gives the impression that Malta is not complying with its international obligations“?
Loosely translated Ms Dalli’s posts reads as follows:
It is being maliciously reported on the way I voted on amendment number 52 on Thursday.
Let’s make things clear:
I absolutely did not vote for Malta to be a rescue center or to leave the ports open. The amendment calls for every EU country to comply with its international obligations. If I didn’t think Malta would not comply with its obligations I would have voted against it because we would have had to try to hide it. Malta has always complied with its international obligations. Only our soldiers continued to do a great job of coordinating rescue missions. I said this everywhere and so I keep saying. I do not intend in any way to cast a shadow on a country name as it gives the impression that Malta is not complying with its international obligations.
The amendment speaks of the need for countries to provide a landing place for rescued people. Malta has already said that under the United Nations Convention on the Law at Sea, the disembarkation of rescued persons can take place in the country where the seafarer who has collected people is registered (flag state).
The amendment says that lives should be protected. Malta has always done its best to protect lives.
The amendment also says that solutions to an immigration issue should be found.
I have spent the last six years working on this issue in the European Parliament and have always put the interest of countries at the forefront because I know we have done a lot in this area and we have great limitations. I am still working with the Maltese authorities to convince my colleagues in the European Parliament about the realities facing Malta.
Certain distortion of facts is unacceptable.