Court dismisses allegations and constitutional case

A judge in the Civil Court yesterday dismissed a constitutional application filed by a man facing extradition to Italy on charges of human trafficking.

Raymond Gauci had filed a constitutional application against the Attorney General, the Justice Minister, the Police Commissioner and Police Inspector Sandro Zarb, claiming that his fundamental human right to a fair hearing had been violated.

On September 25 last, the Court of Criminal Appeal had ruled that Gauci and Anthony Bartolo were to be placed in custody for the purposes of their extradition to Italy to face charges of regular complicity in the trafficking of illegal immigrants to Sicily.

But Gauci claimed he had not been given a fair hearing by an independent and impartial court in accordance with the European convention on human rights and the constitution.

Gauci added that it would be unjust and oppressive were he to be extradited because the charges against him had not been made in good faith and in the interests of justice.

The Court of Criminal Appeal had failed to consider the submissions by his defence counsel about the charges raised against him.

The court was bound not only to examine whether prima facie evidence resulted, but was also bound to examine whether these alleged facts amounted to the crime of regular complicity according to law.

The fact that he was charged with participating in trafficking in illegal immigrants on two occasions, did not mean that the crimes could be classified as one continued offence.

Gauci added that no evidence was brought in this regard, and that the Court of Criminal Appeal had categorically refused to examine whether the essential elements of a continued offence subsisted in this regard.

Gauci also submitted that his fundamental human rights had been violated because his defence counsel could not control the evidence produced in the proceedings against him.

It consisted in hearsay evidence and transcription of evidence (that were not authenticated in terms of law) given by witnesses who had not testified in Malta and who had not been cross-examined by his legal counsel.

He claimed further that the appeal court had not been impartial in determining the good faith of the authorities in this case.

Gauci called on the court to declare that he had not been given a fair hearing and that it would be unjust and oppressive for him to be extradited when the charges against him were not in good faith or in the interests of justice.

He also asked the court to revoke the extradition order.

In a 78-page judgment delivered yesterday, Mr Justice Ray Pace dismissed Gauci's allegations and his constitutional application with costs.