Judge rules right to fair hearing was not breached by PM's comments

A judge turned down a constitutional application filed by three of four men accused with aiding and abetting in the bribery of two former judges in which they claimed that their right to a fair trial had been breached.

Mario Camilleri and his son Pierre and Joseph Zammit had filed the application before the First Hall of the Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction. Anthony Grech Sant, another man facing the same charges, did not file the application.

Since then, Mr Zammit pleaded guilty to the charges brought against him and was sentenced.

The case of the Camilleris and Mr Grech Sant is still pending. They are pleading not guilty to trading in influence, aiding and abetting in the bribery of former judges Noel Arrigo and Patrick Vella and conspiring to commit a crime.

In March 2007, Dr Vella had pleaded guilty to accepting a bribe of Lm10,000 in order to reduce Mario Camilleri's jail term in a drug trafficking case. He was given a two-year jail term.

Dr Arrigo is still awaiting trial.

In his judgment handed down yesterday, Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco ruled that the right to a fair trial had not been violated on the basis of the violation of the presumption of innocence at a news conference given by the then Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami on August 1, 2002.

In their request, the three men referred to a constitutional judgment in which Mr Justice Anton Depasquale, Mr Justice Albert J. Magri and Mr Justice Geoffrey Valenzia had ruled that the judges' right to a fair hearing had been violated by the comments made in the press conference.

They noted that during the press conference, the Prime Minister had informed the public that there were third parties involved in the judges' bribery and, eventually, the third parties were indicted.

They claimed that as the link between the judges' case and their clients' case was manifest and apparent, implying that the judges were guilty also implied that any accomplice in the alleged offence was guilty, whether his involvement was direct or indirect.

However, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco ruled that Dr Fenech Adami had not mentioned anyone by name except for Mario Camilleri who he only mentioned as one of the parties of an appeals case over which the bribery case was based. He, therefore, ruled that their right to a fair hearing had not been breached.