Dalli advert not libellous – appeal court

The Court of Appeal has revoked a judgment of the Magistrates Court in terms of which Frans Ghirxi, editor of L-Orizzont, was ordered to pay €3,000 to former Finance Minister John Dalli.

In his writ before the first court Mr Dalli claimed that he had been libelled by an advert published in a supplement to the newspaper in March 2003. The advert, which also appeared on billboards, showed a photo of Mr Dalli and of the Prime Minister under the heading Fejn marru l-miljuni? (where did those millions go?).

According to Mr Dalli, this advert implied that he had been involved in some unlawful activity that generated millions of Liri and that he was guilty of abuse.

The advert was published when there was public debate about the “Daewoo” issue, the financing of Mater Dei Hospital and the sale of bank shares to HSBC.

The Magistrates Court had found in favour of Mr Dalli and had ruled that the advert was libellous in his regard. Mr Ghirxi was ordered to pay €3,000 in libel damages.

Mr Ghirxi then appealed to the Court of Appeal (in its Inferior jurisdiction) presided over by Mr Justice Philip Sciberras.

He submitted that the advert did not contain allegations of corruption on Mr Dalli’s part. The advert took the form of criticism and observations on unrestrained expenditure, the cheap sale of a bank and incompetence in administration of public funds.

The courts, said Mr Justice Sciberras, had long observed the principle that a person in politics was exposed to criticism on all that he did, and that such criticism was not libellous so long as it was reasonable. The role of the newspapers included that of carrying out serious and reasonable criticism of public figures in order to repress abuses and to ensure that politicians carried out their duties in the public interest.

The advert in question, said the court, took the form of a question asking where the millions of liri had gone. This question was in connection with the cases of HSBC, Daewoo and the Mater Dei hospital. These issues, said the court, were the subject of heated debate in 2003 and the debate included public finances.

Mr Justice Sciberras said that a reader seeing this advert would not necessarily reach the conclusion that Mr Dalli had been involved in some abuse. The advert was not therefore libellous.

The court therefore overturned and revoked the first court’s judgment.