Ex-Judge to be jailed in section for 'vulnerable' people

Former Judge Patrick Vella yesterday expressed remorse for his actions soon after he pleaded guilty to accepting a Lm10,000 bribe to reduce a drug trafficker's jail term by four years.

The former judge was jailed for two years after Mr Justice Giannino Caruana Demajo, presiding over the trial, ruled that his actions "dealt a harsh blow" to the trust the public had in the judicial system.

While condemning the serious nature of the crime, Mr Justice Caruana Demajo noted that he truly believed Dr Vella had repented for his actions, however an effective jail term would be appropriate.

The atmosphere was tense in the court room as Dr Vella, standing in the dock, pleaded guilty to accepting bribes, trading in influence and revealing official secrets in connection with a judgment handed down by the Court of Criminal Appeal in 2002.

Dr Vella had originally been charged together with former Chief Justice Noel Arrigo whose trial is scheduled to start next month.

The bill of indictment, to which Dr Vella admitted, alleged that after being jailed for 16 years for trafficking in cocaine, Mario Camilleri had filed an appeal.

The appeal was to be decided by Dr Arrigo, Dr Vella and Mr Justice Joseph Filletti. Mr Camilleri's son, Pierre, approached a certain Joseph Zammit, known as Is-Sei, who in turn approached Dr Vella in order to reduce Mr Camilleri's jail term in exchange for Lm10,000.

Dr Vella eventually accepted the bribe and Mr Zammit also approached Dr Arrigo who also accepted. Mr Justice Filletti was never involved.

In July 2002, the Court of Criminal Appeal reduced Mr Camilleri's judgement to 12 years. That same day Dr Vella collected Lm5,000 from Mr Zammit.

After Dr Vella filed the guilty plea, his defence counsel read out a statement on his behalf: "He apologises, without any conditions, to Maltese society in general for his actions and declares he is sorry for the damage he caused to the same society".

The defence then made its submissions on punishment for which three witness were called to the stand.

In an emotional testimony, Dr Vella's sister Elsa Vassallo explained that, the day the news broke out, society had judged her brother and sentenced him without allowing him to defend himself.

She said she saw him crumble as he fell from the high rank he occupied and stressed that he suffered a lot and his family had suffered with him.

Consultant Psychiatrist David Cassar testified after he was exempt from professional secrecy and said he first met Dr Vella four years ago.

Recently, Dr Cassar said, he found that Dr Vella suffered from strong anxiety because he feared for his safety if he was sent to jail because he had jailed criminals when he was a judge and some were even imprisoned for life.

The last witness was Fr Ugolino Scerri who explained how he got to know Dr Vella about three years ago when he joined a prayer group for men.

Fr Scerri said he had tried to help Dr Vella find a job but it was difficult as society had cast him aside. He explained how he witnessed Dr Vella's humility and added that all men who erred deserved a second chance. Dr Vella, he said, had suffered for his actions and he called on the court to practise forgiveness.

Lawyer Michael Sciriha said the defence was requesting the court to hand down a suspended jail term.

He noted there were various mitigating factors in his client's favour. Dr Vella had fully cooperated with the police, had filed an early guilty plea and had a clean criminal record.

He also asked the court to consider the lapse of time, the fact that the former judge had spent time under house arrest, his age and the fact that he feared for his safety in jail.

"Jail implies that one is deprived of freedom but, imposing daily fear on that person was another punishment," the lawyer argued, adding that the humility his client faced was also a punishment.

"Once he was sitting up there on the Bench and now he is down in the dock. That is a punishment," he added.

Limiting himself to the judgment handed down by the Constitutional Court on October 29, 2003, lawyer Toni Abela noted that the court had ruled that Dr Vella's right to a fair trial had been violated on the basis of the violation of the presumption of innocence at a news conference given by the Prime Minister in August 2002.

Dr Abela said yesterday was the third time his client would be punished. First he was punished when his human rights had been breached and then he was punished during the social trial and the trial by the media.

Assistant Attorney General Stephen Tonna Lowell, prosecuting, stressed on the serious nature of the crime.

This crime was serious because the trust the public rightly expects to have in the judicial system was betrayed for Lm10,000, he said.

Although he agreed there were mitigating factors and Dr Vella had cooperated with the police, it was not full cooperation.

After hearing submissions, Mr Justice Caruana Demajo ruled there was no doubt that, if taken objectively without applying mitigating factors, the punishment handed down ought to go in the direction of the maximum jail term. In this case great damage had been done to the judicial system.

The fact that a judge in the Court of Criminal Appeal could be bribed was a "harsh blow" to the public's trust in the judicial system especially when one took into account that the case involved drug trafficking.

He then noted that there did exist mitigating factors such as the fact that Dr Vella pleaded guilty, which signalled that he had realised his mistake as was evident in his public apology.

The court was sensitive to the fact that it should not play the part of Pilate and hand down a judgment to satisfy the public rather then serve justice.

As for the Constitutional Court's judgment, this was more relevant in terms of adjudicating guilt and not in matters of punishment.

He said he believed that Dr Vella was sorry and would not break the law again but in such a case an effective jail term was appropriate and he felt that, that way, Dr Vella would finally personally feel he had paid his dues to society.

He thus jailed Dr Vella for two years and ordered that the time spent in preventive custody be deducted from the jail term adding that any time spent under house arrest did not qualify.

He also recommended to prison authorities to ensure that Dr Vella would be given all necessary medical and psychological help and ensure his safety.

Dr Vella's lawyers then asked the judge to recommend that their client be placed in a different institution. They were told to file a written application containing the request.

The application was quickly filed but the judge turned down the request arguing that the prison authorities were in the best position to ensure Dr Vella's safety.

Sources said Dr Vella will he kept in a prison section for "vulnerable" people.

Lawyers Toni Abela, José Herrera, Michael Sciriha and Roberto Montalto were defence counsel.

Case background

Court proceedings against former Judge Patrick Vella started when he was arraigned together with former Chief Justice Noel Arrigo on August 4, 2002.

The judges were charged with two counts of bribery and with revealing official secrets in connection with the judgment handed down by the Court of Criminal Appeal.

They then filed a case in the First Hall of the Civil Court arguing that comments by the then Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami during a press conference on August 1, 2002, were in breach of their fundamental human rights.

In a December 4, 2002 judgment, the Civil Court held that the declarations by the Prime Minister could not be considered as statements of guilt and declared that the judges' fundamental rights had not been breached.

The Civil Court directed the Magistrates' Court to continue hearing the compilation of evidence against the judges.

The accused then appealed to the Constitutional Court and, in a judgment on October 29, 2003, this court ruled that the judges' right to a fair trial had been violated on the basis of the violation of the presumption of innocence at the news conference given by the Prime Minister.

The Constitutional Court, however, concluded that as the judges' fundamental human right to trial by an independent and impartial court had not been violated, there was no reason to halt the criminal proceedings against them.

They then took their case to the European Court of Human Rights arguing that their right to be tried by an impartial and independent tribunal had been breached, their presumption of innocence had not been respected and their case was not redressed in an effective manner.

In May 2005, the European Court rejected the three complaints and declared their application inadmissible.

Last year, Joseph Zammit was jailed for two years after he admitted to bribing the two former judges.

He had been charged together with Mario Camilleri, Pierre Camilleri and businessman Anthony John Grech Sant.