VAT fraud case punishment severe enough - defence counsel
Two lawyers today urged a court not to alter punishments against two men who pleaded guilty in the VAT fraud case last month. They were handed a suspended sentence, a general perpetual interdiction and a fine.
Their comments came in submissions on punishment following an appeal filed by the Attorney General.
Lawyer Veronique Dalli said that her client - VAT Department employee Carmel Deguara, who is currently suspended because of the proceedings - did not tamper with any documents. She therefore asked for the punishment to be confirmed and not to be increased to a jail term, as had been requested by the AG.
She also said that because of this general interdiction Mr Deguara would automatically lose his job and could never hold a warrant or work in the civil service.
Dr Edward Gatt, appearing for Jesmond Abela, said that as his client did not instigate or look to get involved in the case, the punishment was severe enough and completely within the parameters of law.
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
J Oatmon
Oct 14th 2009, 09:51
I think the critical point is that these people would have happily kept pocketing the tax payers cash for many more years, but now they have been caught they and thier lawyers are painting a different picture (see below): -
"Dr Edward Gatt, appearing for Jesmond Abela, said that as his client did not instigate or look to get involved in the case, the punishment was severe enough and completely within the parameters of law".
Not one of these defendents reported these crimes at any time, they all took their pay offs week after week, and carried on stealing year after year - how can this be some sort of 'misdemeanour minimal sentence situation' They deserve harsh punishment, not the usual 'slap on the wrist', which disgusts all honest hard working citizens.
mario busuttil
Oct 14th 2009, 09:07
WE are not judges, but if a person buy stolen goods there is a prison sentence the same as a thief commets a crime, the only thing that is not clear is that these accountants are still holding the Warrant. I don't agree as a first time prison sentence but i will hold him the warrant FOREVER so even when there will be more accountants still doing frauds THEY WILL THINK TWICE NOW!!!!
A. Borg
Oct 14th 2009, 07:28
T.Borg, kullhadd irid jerfgha r-responsabilita ta ghemilu. Mela jien naghmel xi 5 snin nghix hajja ta lussu u nibdel il-karozza kull 6 xhur,kuljum niekol barra,insiefer xi 5 darbiet f'sena u dan minn fuq it-taxxa li nhallas jien u li thallas int imbaghad ninqabad u tigi int u tghid biex nuru hniena mieghu. Jien bhala nisrani nahfirlu ghax kullhadd uman imma bi dritt nipretendi li jiehu l-kastig li haqqu.
V. Micallef
Oct 13th 2009, 21:52
T.Borg, I think we've all come far since the cavemen, but if you must use the example, here's a story for you. One cavemen goes out to hunt for food to store for winter, while his wife (not stereotyping here, just making a point - before the feminists come charging out) scrubs the cave walls and brushes the dirt floor with a piece of raptor's tail. While hubbie is out, another caveman comes in, clubs the wife unconscious and steals the food that has been put away till now. Thief leaves, hubbie comes back, follows the trail of food left by the thief, catches him scoffing his face, and proceeds to ram dinosaur thigh bones down the other caveman's throat. All this in the absence of law enforcement and courts of justice. Today there are the means - and those means are not designed or managed well enough to deal with the criminals. Just as the food thief should return what he has stolen or misappropriated, so should the public officers who are duty bound to serve their country with diligence. An eye for an eye, not an eye for an eyelash.
Trevor Lorenzo Mizzi
Oct 13th 2009, 20:29
If only these two men got caught with a cannabis cigarette each while arrested for the alleged VAT fraud, then they would be sentenced to prison ;-))
The judicial priorities are all upside down on these islands.
Michael Neville Cassar
Oct 13th 2009, 20:20
@T Borg I do not agree with you, it is not a question of hatred but integrity. We the tax payers are sick of being highest, by persons which are their duty to administer our society in ever aspect it would do a lot of good, if the punishment is a deterrent to all civil servants and stop abusers. Only today I heard that because a person who delayed VAT payment was asked to pay a sum of € 12000 as punishment for the delay. After redress it came down to Lm10. The public need to be reassured that civil officers carry their duties accordingly.
t. borg
Oct 13th 2009, 19:51
If they have clean conduct. Cooperated with the police and admitted, in my opinion they do not have to go to prison making other people pay in more taxes. The prison is already full. Come on let’s grow up and remove our hatred from our Christian hearts. Never think that you cannot make a mistake we all are relatives of cave people.
Franco Farrugia
Oct 13th 2009, 19:19
Obviously. What do you expect the defence counsel to say?
Jason Pace
Oct 13th 2009, 18:55
Can someone please explain to me since yet I did not find a clear answer whether the money allegedly frauded will be returned?
Anthony Mizzi
Oct 13th 2009, 18:30
Severe enough?
By what measure, by the fee lawyers charge which is in many instances higher than the fines and booty is never fully refunded?