A compilation of 53 opinions on European Court judgments by Judge Giovanni Bonello has been published in a book called When Judges Dissent - Separate Opinions of Judge Giovanni Bonello at the European Court of Human Rights.
The book is edited by Mario Schiavone, published by the Institute of Maltese Journalists, with the help of the Strickland Foundation, and printed at Progress Press.
President Emeritus Guido de Marco recalled his and Judge Bonello's University days when they both formed part of a political student group which used to meet at the house of Judge Bonello's father. Those times had formed their political beliefs and agenda and the way they looked at the country, he said.
Prof. De Marco said he had supported Judge Bonello's nomination for the European Court of Human Rights, believing he was the best choice.
His book, he said, was fuel for lawyers who believed in human rights and worked for these rights to be achieved, especially when times were difficult.
Judge Bonello was an activist in the European Court where, as a judge, he demonstrated the dynamism of European human rights law.
His judgments were a literary work and the best instrument for human liberty.
Mr Schiavone said that even when Judge Bonello agreed with the judgments given by the European Court, there were instances where he thought the remedy given was not enough.
Describing Judge Bonello as a champion of human rights, he said he was courageous enough to criticise his colleagues. He expressed his opinions in a very studied manner and he usually sided with the citizen.
In a particular case against Italy, where a person was arrested and illegally detained for 48 days, Judge Bonello expressed regret that Italian law did not grant him any hope of redress and a greater regret that this was not even granted by the court of human rights.
In judgments on similar cases which followed his opinions, the European Court came round and accepted Judge Bonello's arguments. This should be of satisfaction for Judge Bonello, who also criticised Maltese laws where he felt he should, and for Malta.
Criminal lawyer Joe Giglio said the book had been possible because there was a convention protecting human rights and because the Maltese government had, in 1987, made this convention part of Maltese law.
The book showed that the judges at the European court had a process of judiciary dialogue between them. It showed that through the logic of persuasion, used in his opinions, Judge Bonello managed to get people to see the convention in the same way as he did.
Dr Giglio described Judge Bonello's opinions as literature at the service of the law. He pointed out that other judges had commented that his opinions were the lifeblood of the European Court of Human Rights and one could not remain indifferent to them.
Judge Bonello said that while the convention guaranteed fairness, for example, it failed to speak about one's right of access to a court. It was through the work of active judges that the convention was expanded, transforming the original negative duties it had placed on governments into positive obligations.