Moreover, one of the key arguments of the station is that the Labour Party has been historically disadvantaged and discriminated against in the local news sector – therefore, the party needs a station dedicated to ensuring that labour’s voice does not go unheard.

“Even today, the Labour Party’s message hardly ever lands in an objective manner by the media, both the official newsrooms, and the ones started more recently,” ONE’s lawyer, Pawlu Lia, told court.

“The only way for the Labour Party to ensure that its political message travels is for the party to have its own media.”

He went on to say that to Article 119 of the Constitution that the claimant – Lovin Malta – is using in its case was written during times when local broadcasting, through radio and television, was very restricted and controlled.

This article states that broadcasting services must preserve impartiality in respect of matters of political or industrial controversy or relating to current public policy and that broadcasting facilities and time are fairly divided between persons belonging to different political parties.

During those times, Lia argued, not everyone had the means necessary to share their political opinions on TV and radio broadcasting. Nowadays, means of broadcasting are a lot more accessible.

“The claimant itself has a website where it publishes articles, audio and video without the restrictions that it wants to pose on the defendant. Like ONE TV, Lovin Malta broadcasts its own political message.”

The lawyer went on to say that most websites have their own agenda which they push through the work they publish, claiming that this often includes an agenda against the Labour Party.

This is why the party should have its own media, Lia argued, to ensure that the Labour Party’s freedom of expression is protected.

Lovin Malta is challenging a proviso in Article 13 of the Broadcasting Act which enables party stations to exist on the premise that they balance each other out, even though Malta’s Constitution, the highest law in the land, clearly states that all broadcast media should be as much as possible impartial.

What do you make of the Labour Party’s argument that they need ONE to have a fair national discussion?