1998 elections incident judgment confirmed

An appeal court yesterday confirmed a judgment handed down by the Magistrates` Court and ruled that a Siggiewi man`s physical involvement in the beating of a financial controller at Enemalta Corporation in 1998 had not been proven.

Mr Justice Vincent De Gaetano agreed with the Magistrates` Court that Carmelo Agius, 54, was "simply a spectator" in the beating of Tarcisio Mifsud that took place in the aftermath of the 1998 general elections.

Agius was originally charged with Kola Aquilina and Saviour Dimech, both 42, of Siggiewi. The latter two men were found guilty of seriously injuring Mifsud by beating him with a chain and bottle, causing damage to the detriment of Mifsud and Enemalta Corporation and breaching the peace.

Aquilina was also found guilty of stealing a set of keys and was conditionally discharged for three years. Dimech had also been found guilty of perjury and was conditionally discharged for two years. Both were fined Lm25.

Agius was, however, cleared of the injury charge and only found guilty of breaching the peace. He was fined Lm25 after the Magistrates` Court ruled he was only a spectator in the beating and could not be found guilty of complicity because he had not been charged with it.

The Attorney General appealed the part of the Magistrates` Court`s judgment in which Agius was cleared. He argued that article 467(2) of the Criminal Code laid down that: "Where there is no proof that the accused, or any one of the accused, was the principal or one of the principals in the offence charged (with)... but there is proof that he was an accomplice, it shall be lawful... to find him guilty of complicity in that offence".

Mr Justice De Gaetano agreed with the Attorney General`s application of the law and said that the Magistrates` Court had been wrong in dismissing the complicity charge.

But the judge ruled that in order for Agius` complicity to be proven, the prosecution had to first prove he was aware of Aquilina and Dimech`s intentions or that he helped them carry out the crime in some way.

As this had not been proven, Agius` role as an accomplice had not been proven and the fact that he was present when Mifsud was beaten up did not make him an accomplice.

Dr Joseph Giglio was counsel to Agius.