Judge denies conflict with code of ethics

Judge Lino Farrugia Sacco has defended himself for the first time against the claim that his involvement with the Malta Olympic Committee breaches the judiciary's code of ethics, quoting a judgment of the Chief Justice who sits on the commission that had highlighted the breach.

Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano sits on the Commission for the Administration of Justice, which has in the past accused Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco of breaching the judiciary's code of ethics by presiding over the Malta Olympic Committee.

The judgment in question says that, if a judge feels that his conscience is clear, he does not need to feel uncomfortable or threatened about his independence. It is he and no one else that decides - if there is anything to decide - on what he should do if the Commission for the Administration of Justice draws his attention to something which in the Commission's opinion may not be conducive to an efficient and proper functioning of the court or which could affect the trust conferred by his appointment, or to any failure on his part to abide by a code of ethics.

This excerpt, besides being part of the judgment, is one of the articles that regulate the Commission for the Administration of Justice.

The judge last year received a letter from the commission informing him that, as long as he kept his post, he was in breach of the code of ethics for the judiciary. Magistrate Antonio Mizzi, the president of the Malta Basketball Association, received a similar letter.

The code states that members of the judiciary "cannot hold any position, even if temporary, voluntary or honorary, and neither can they carry out any activity which, in the view of the Commission... may compromise their position, duties or functions."

Nonetheless, on Wednesday, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco was confirmed as MOC president until 2012 after he stood uncontested for re-election. Replying to questions from The Times during an MOC press conference yesterday, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco produced the judgment to substantiate his position, pointing out that he could have put up this defence two years ago, when the issue first erupted, but he preferred to keep his mouth shut.

He said he did not want to enter into any polemics on the issue and stated emphatically that he had no intention of defying anyone. He insisted that he was simply exercising his constitutional rights and that nowhere in a democratic world do these restrictions exist.

"The Secretary General of Switzerland is a judge, the Chef de Mission of the United States in Beijing was a judge. Indeed the International Olympic Committee, the European Olympic Committee, the Commonwealth Games Federation and the Mediterranean Games are all against such concepts," he said.

He said he had a stack of other examples of colleagues who were or are in similar circumstances but who were not publicly censured by the commission as he and Mr Justice Mizzi had been.

He also complained about a story that appeared in The Times on Tuesday in which it was stated that he was defying the Commission by standing for re-election. He said the word "defy" was misleading, since neither he nor Magistrate Mizzi ever had any intention of defying anyone.

Besides barring the judiciary from forming part of such organisations, the code of ethics also says that a judge cannot occupy any position on an association that receives funds from the government. The MOC received a total of €1.62 million from the government between November 1, 2004 and October 31 this year, of which it distributed €885,000 in grants to various sports organisations.

On this point, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco insisted that to the Constitution, the terms of reference of a member of the judiciary could not change after his appointment. Therefore, he said, the code of ethics for the judiciary which came into force after his appointment did not apply to him.

See full video of Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco's replies on

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20081113/local/judge-denies-conflict-with-code-of-ethics