Constitutional Court confirms ruling in DVDs raid case

The Constitutional Court yesterday confirmed a judgment of the First Hall of the Civil Court that had ruled that the Police Commissioner acted unfairly towards a company when officers raided its premises.

This judgment was delivered by Chief Justice Vincent Degaetano, Mr Justice Joseph D. Camilleri and Mr Justice Joseph A. Filletti in the case filed by Visual and Sound Communications Ltd against the police.

The company had claimed that its fundamental human rights had been violated by the Police Commissioner in the course of raids carried out by the police.

The court heard that the police had carried out a number of raids and had seized 1,500 DVDs valued at Lm20,000 from the company's various outlets. This happened after a magistrate had opened an inquiry on the basis of an allegation that the company's outlets were selling pirated DVDs. However, the company argued it had never dealt in counterfeit merchandise.

The first court said the Police Commissioner was bound to obey an order issued to him by an inquiring magistrate. The court could not therefore condemn the Police Commissioner for carrying out the investigation for he had had no choice but to do so.

It added that it could not understand why the company's premises were occupied by the police at noon but that it took officers entrusted with the seizure until after midnight to arrive on the scene.

Throughout that period, the shops were closed and the employees were not allowed to go home. Company director Grace Borg was not even allowed to enter her own office. All this could have been avoided had there been better coordination between the various police officers involved.

The first court did not find any incompetence or negligence by the police but it had upheld the company's claim that the police raid had been unfair. The company had claimed that the raids against it had been discriminatory and that it had been deprived of enjoyment of its own property.

The court ruled that it could find that a violation had taken place even if a governmental authority had acted legitimately. Actions could be legal and authorised by law, but could still constitute a violation, for the manner in which a power was exercised could be detrimental to a right.

The Police Commissioner's actions in this case might have been legal but could not be termed correct or fair in a democratic society, for the police were bound to carry out their duties with the least disturbance to the individual.

If a raid was to take place then this had to be coordinated beforehand.

Furthermore, the subjects of the raid were to be informed of the reason for the investigation, and were to be subjected to the least possible inconvenience.

The company was entitled to compensation for the manner in which the raid had been carried out, though this had to be calculated on the basis that the police actions had been unfair but not of great gravity.

The court therefore awarded the company Lm250 in compensation.

The Police Commissioner appealed to the Constitutional Court which noted that the police had not submitted any evidence before the first court but had only submitted an abridged copy of the procès verbal of the case.

From the full copy exhibited at the court's request, it resulted that the police had taken action against the company even before the magisterial inquiry had commenced. This amounted to interference in the company's rights to property.

The Constitutional Court therefore dismissed the Police Commissioner's appeal and confirmed the judgment of the first court.