Magistrate abstains in case involving the Chief Justice

A magistrate involved in a dispute with the Commission for the Administration of Justice over claims that his presidency of a sports organisation is in breach of the code of ethics of the judiciary yesterday refused to preside over a case involving the commission's vice president - Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano - as the victim of an alleged criminal offence.

Magistrate Antonio Mizzi issued a decree in the case of Roderick Pace, 24, from Gżira, who was charged with threatening the Chief Justice and his wife, driving recklessly and breaching the peace last November 9 in Regional Road, St Julians.

The magistrate sent the case back to the Courts Registrar so that it can be assigned to another magistrate. Magistrate Mizzi said he wants to ensure that "justice is not only done but is seen to be done".

He referred to the controversy in which he and Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco are involved.

In October last year, the Commission for the Administration of Justice published correspondence it sent to the two members of the judiciary regarding their presidency of the Malta Olympic Committee, in the case of Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco, and of the Malta Basketball Association, in the case of Magistrate Mizzi.

It informed them that their position was in breach of the code of ethics for the judiciary. Both the judge and the magistrate have publicly declared they will not relinquish the post they hold in the sports organisations.

In his decree, Magistrate Mizzi said the commission had first published the correspondence and then asked the government to boycott him and Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco. He was never formally told about the boycott and neither was he ever given an explanation on the reasons behind such boycott.

He referred to an article in the Code of Organisation and Civil Procedure related to cases where a judge or magistrate can or has to abstain from presiding over a case. He made specific reference to a sub-article stipulating that a member of the judiciary can abstain if "... he... is directly or indirectly interested in the event of the suit".

The magistrate said that although his circumstances are not directly mentioned in the article of the law dealing with abstentions, he decided to apply the law "in the most extensive manner".

He said that in view of the problems he has had and is having with the Commission for the Administration of Justice, on which the Chief Justice sits as vice president, he felt it was better for him to abstain from hearing the case so that "justice is not only done but is seen to be done". He, therefore, sent the case back to the Courts Registrar for it to be assigned to another magistrate.

Last week, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco referred to the matter in a judgment he handed down while presiding over the First Hall of the Civil Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction. The case was about a woman who filed a complaint with the Commission for the Administration of Justice about lengthy proceedings. The commission refused to give information about the complaint the woman filed saying that the cases it deals with remain confidential. However, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco said he was "perplexed" about this because the commission had issued a press release about his case and that of Magistrate Mizzi.