This communication is first and foremost intended as a tribute to Mr. Justice Raymond C. Pace for his indefatigable work at our still deficient FAMILY COURT. Mr. Justice's PACE work in the FAMILY COURT, along with that of his dedicated staff, has gone a long way towards avoiding a total stagnation of what I regard as the most stressful section in the various functions of our Courts of Justice.

May Mr. Justice PACE return to the Law Courts as soon as possible while I personally wish him to get better following a period of forced absence that I am sure he unwillingly had to take from our Family Court. The Best of Health to him.

Whether it is a result of this occurrence or not, word has already spread round that Mr. Justice Pace will continue to preside over our Family Court, but with regard to the preliminary phase of MEDIATION, this apparently will now be assigned to another Judge. It is unacceptable on the part of our competent authorities, the politicians in this regard, not to heed the advice of professionals who have been working in the Family Court for many years now, not to take seriously the need for a properly-constructed infrastructure for our Family Court.

Family Lawyers do it as part of their natural professional process in the field of matrimonial disputes to attempt first and foremost to reconcile a couple before commencing on the actual seperation proceedings. Without in anyway deflating the sterling work that has been done by a number of Mediators, it has already resulted that since the new regulations about the Family Court came into effect, practically since January 7th of this year, already 1,200 applications for separations have been made and this in a period of only eight months! We are unnecessarily prolonging the suffering of married persons who may want to get on with their lives through proceedings, which by and large can be eliminated so that with better coordination, one would attain the objective for which he or she maybe determined.

It seems we are going back to the system, which was in practice. The reason for this is that our diminutively-minded politicians do not want to heed the maxim that serious matters must be planned on a long term basis, so that we would have a solid infrastructure and persons involved suffer less, spend less, and suit themselves better to a new mode of life.

It is with regret that our Government has not yet legislated for a Divorce Law to be applicable to local issues. There is no place for an Ecclesiastical Tribunal in our country which functions in accordance with a law (Canon Law), which is incompatible with our legal system and, therefore, extraneous and foreign. Let politicians see to the welfare of the people and not to their personal interest and that of their political party.

Yours Truly:
Emmy D. BEZZINA: Chairman: Family Rights' Association. Valletta.