Sant loses libel case against The Times

A court yesterday dismissed a libel action filed by former Labour leader Alfred Sant against The Times over a letter concerning an incident that took place at the Ta' Qali counting hall following the 2003 EU referendum.

The letter was published under the heading Uphold Democracy on April 1, 2003 and Dr Sant asked the court to order Raymond Bugeja, the editor, to pay him damages for libel.

Mr Bugeja pleaded that the letter was fair comment based upon facts that had occurred.

Magistrate Michael Mallia noted that Dr Sant's complaint was based upon two paragraphs which alleged that after the referendum he entered the Ta' Qali counting hall accompanied by 20 to 30 persons. The letter queried whether he and his entourage had passed through the security checks.

Dr Sant also felt libelled by the allegation that no one could feel safe in the counting hall.

The former Opposition Leader denied being accompanied by any persons. He also denied being in breach of any security checks. He told the court that in his time as leader of the Malta Labour Party he had dispensed with bodyguards and persons accompanying him.

Magistrate Mallia established that Sant had arrived at the counting hall in his own car accompanied by George Vella and Joseph Brincat. They had passed through the security checks and had not been accompanied by other persons.

However, once they entered the counting hall they were surrounded by journalists and other persons who were in the counting hall.

The people moved towards Dr Sant asking him for his comments, as there were already indications of the referendum result. At one stage there was confusion when the crowd tried approaching him.

The photos taken showed the crowd gathered around Dr Sant but at no time was there any violence towards any persons in the counting hall. It therefore clearly resulted that Dr Sant had not been accompanied by 20 or 30 persons, nor had his arrival at the counting hall been abrupt or simultaneous as claimed in the letter.

However, any person who had not seen Dr Sant entering the hall would have been justified in thinking that all those persons surrounding him had entered the counting hall with him.

The author of the letter was therefore justified when he expressed his opinion about security within the Ta' Qali complex, particularly in the light of the forthcoming general election in 2003.

An opinion, said the court, could be classified as fair comment even if it was not based upon proven facts. The letter might not have been correct but it reflected the author's impression of the scene as it occurred.

Magistrate Mallia therefore dismissed Dr Sant's claims with costs against him.