In my perspective, the era where students merely listen to their law lecturers and accept things as they are is no longer applicable. It is, therefore, uplifting to encourage students to actively participate, even to the point of expressing dissent with their lecturers’ academic perspectives.
An illustrative example is GHSL’s response to my insights after I provided a critical analysis of my viewpoint on their proposal concerning a Judicial Review Act, which was ultimately presented to Parliament by the Nationalist Opposition.
Nevertheless, I stand firm in my position, placing particular emphasis on distinguishing between legislative and administrative acts. I retain the importance to underscore the essential clarification of ‘performing a public function’. I also challenge the perception of ‘tribunals’ as ‘judicial organs’. I will continue to insist about the necessity for a comprehensive impact assessment prior to introducing any provisions that could potentially compromise the rights of individuals under investigation.
All this being said, I appreciate GHSL’s responsive counteraction.
By coincidence, this morning, newly appointed Judge Henri Mizzi encouraged lawyers in a seminar organized by Kamra ta’ l-Avukati to actively participate in critical discourse and publicly scrutinize his forthcoming judgments.
This effort represents a positive step in dismantling the barriers between traditionally isolated spheres. I doubt whether this news will be covered in the mainstream media, but this is the direction we should pursue.
