Guest Post: Shut Up And Obey – KSU’s Gag Order Exposes Malta’s Democracy Crisis
Yesterday’s decision by KSU to remove Moviment Graffitti’s stand during Freshers’ Week because it contained pro-choice flyers is a glaring example of a much deeper issue: the undemocratic culture that has become ingrained in many Maltese institutions.
This is not just about the student’s council or our university; it reflects a broader societal problem where those in power — whether in political parties, organisations, or now even student bodies — stifle open debate and impose their will on others.
Such actions directly undermine the fundamental principles of democracy, the rule of law, and the protection of fundamental rights.
Democracy is built on the right to free expression, the rule of law, and the safeguarding of fundamental rights. When institutions, whether political or academic, suppress the right to express differing opinions, they do more than stifle individual voices—they erode the very foundations of democratic society.
By removing the stand, KSU violated not only the rights of the students involved but also the essential democratic principle that all voices, especially those that challenge the status quo, deserve to be heard. This is a breach of the rule of law, which mandates that rights and freedoms be equally protected for everyone.
Undemocratic practices have become so normalised in Malta that we hardly notice them anymore.
Political parties, for instance, are notorious for their rigid control over MPs, who are expected to toe the party line and repeat the same positions, as if they do not have independent minds.
These MPs, elected to represent diverse constituencies, end up sounding like they are representing a single, homogeneous group. In reality, Parliament should be a space for diverse opinions, where debate reflects the variety of perspectives within the electorate. Instead, it has become a place where dissent is not tolerated, and the leadership of both our parties decides the narrative.
This problem is not confined to Parliament. The same top-down, undemocratic control can be seen in various organisations across Malta, including KSU’s actions at the University of Malta. By removing the stand distributing pro-choice flyers, KSU effectively decided what issues are “acceptable” for students to engage with, stripping students of their right to explore and discuss different ideas.
Universities should be the last place where this kind of censorship occurs. They are supposed to be spaces where students engage in debate, challenge each other’s views, and develop the critical thinking skills necessary for democratic participation.
What makes the situation at the University of Malta particularly troubling is that universities are meant to be spaces where undemocratic tendencies are challenged, not reinforced. The rule of law, democracy, and fundamental rights mandate that universities serve as places where diverse opinions can flourish.
By shutting down this perspective, KSU not only stifled one viewpoint but also undermined the very essence of what a university should be — a platform for free thought, intellectual growth, and open debate. If students are not exposed to different perspectives at university, where are they supposed to develop the skills to think critically and engage in democratic discourse?
Sadly, this undemocratisation is not unique to Malta. In Europe and around the world, we have seen similar attempts to control public discourse.
In Poland, for example, the former government cracked down on protests and controlled the media narrative during the debate on abortion rights. In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government has systematically taken control of universities, curbing academic freedom and silencing dissent. In Turkey, President Erdoğan’s regime has jailed academics and restricted freedom of speech within educational institutions. In each case, the goal is to stifle debate and maintain control over the narrative.
Scholars like Noam Chomsky and Jürgen Habermas have long warned about the dangers of suppressing dissent. In Manufacturing Consent, Chomsky shows how institutions manipulate discourse to maintain control, undermining democratic values—exactly what KSU has done by silencing pro-choice voices. Habermas, meanwhile, argues that open debate is essential for democracy, and when institutions like universities restrict it, they erode the very foundation of democratic society. KSU’s actions mirror this wider threat to free speech and democracy.
The control exercised yesterday mirrors the broader undemocratic culture in Maltese society. In political parties, the leadership decides the message, and members follow suit, with little room for internal discussion or divergent opinions.
This concentration of power leads to a stifling of debate and perpetuates a system where those in power dictate the terms of public discourse. The same undemocratic tendencies have now found their way into some NGOs and now in student politics, which should be encouraging freedom of thought and expression, not suppressing it.
Moreover, the broader context of Maltese society exacerbates the problem. In a country where political leaders exercise tight control over the narrative, where MPs must repeat the same mantra as if they are devoid of independent thought, and where a journalist has been murdered to forever silence her, it is no surprise that this mentality has seeped into student politics.
The message from those in power, whether in Parliament or student councils, is clear: disagreement is not welcome, and the leadership will decide what is acceptable to discuss.
If we are to reverse this trend of undemocratisation, we must start by fostering spaces for open debate and discussion at every level of society, especially in educational institutions.
We must challenge the idea that those in power have the right to control what can be discussed and demand that our institutions — whether Parliament, political parties, or student councils — serve as platforms for dialogue, not as gatekeepers of public discourse. Only then can we hope to build a more democratic and open society where all voices are heard.
Cyrus Engerer is a former Labour MEP