Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I believe that it would be wrong to try dismiss it. Though one must admit that having someone in such a prominent role in University student politics; proclaiming himself to be the answer to most issues, may see an unprecedented downward spiral.
When Mr.Dario Cacopardo published his letter to your media house, I still wanted proof to the serious allegations made against the SDM President. Even though there are major differences between Pulse and SDM, I will always maintain my stark belief that one cannot mudsling someone following an electoral defeat.
It was however, a complete different story when Mr.Cacopardo published clear proof of the involvement of SDM President. What makes matters worse are the very comments that were made in regard to Mr Cacopardo himself.
What is yet to be made clear is why SDM published a press release denying their involvement in the KPS election, when their own President was doing the opposite.
A concerning matter is the very notion that these negative comments were being put forward by the same person who should be setting an example to the Student Body, as he should be responsible enough to know that one should not involve another party. This is even more so since the very conversation, shown in the print-screens was one regarding KSU and the KPS elections. As was stated in the leaked evidence Mr Micallef told the other party he was chatting with that “KSU is part of a team”. Such comments seem to allege that KSU is part of some other type of external machine. An allegation which places both KSU and KPS in a bad light, it was therefore for this reason that in the last KPS meeting Pulse asked KSU members present to issue a statement regarding the matter.
This brings one to question whether or not there are any matters that the University student body is not aware of, matters exclusive only to the selected few. Such a question may be brought to light when one reads the very conversation that was brought forward last KPS meeting, since in the beginning there are sentences which seem to categorically denote that SDM aims to maintain a monopoly on KSU. Mr.Micallef reiterated that at no point did he speak to other student organisations to sway their vote against Mr.Cacopardo. Yet, at the same time the conversation that was brought forward brings proof positive of the directly opposite, as he goes on to write: “imma nies taghna taghna, jafu x’ghandhom jaghmlu, u nkunu nafu”.
The conversation seems to show Mr.Micallef desperately pleading the other party to vote for Ms Sutton, in that he writes “Jekk tahseb fina nibqa nafulek.” Such a statement is proof that the KPS electoral voting was hijacked by partisan interests, even though this does not necessarily implicate the voting process.
The repercussions of this sad episode will be felt even in future endeavours that KPS undertakes, as they place next year’s candidates under unnecessary pressure to prove their impartiality when elected to KSU. They therefore do not augur well to anyone who will be next year’s KSU, thus creating the very risk of increasing student apathy rather than decreasing it.
My advice to Mr Micallef is that he should focus on apologising to Mr Cacopardo instead of trying to picture himself as someone who knows what can and cannot be done in the role of Social Policy Commissioner. Following which, I go on to conclude with these remarks: SDM President should try to understand the struggles that underpins being an independent candidate. These leaked conversations go on to state what Pulse has been stating for a long time; that SDM has a monopoly that it seeks to maintain. This monopoly is the very reason for which they are against introducing Proportional Representation for KSU Elections.