Court turns down Security Service objections to production of wire tapping warrant

Ramon Casha

Nov 6th 2009, 05:11

I agree with this court decision. No entity - not even the security service - should be allowed to operate without any form of oversight. That's what the warrants are there for. Besides, everybody involved in laws - writing them or enforcing them - should be exemplary in their own observation of all laws.

reno calleja

Nov 5th 2009, 22:20

This was a very important decision by the Court.

In the U.K, who have a serious problem with terroirist attacks, the debate about wire tapping took a serious dimention under Tony Blair,when a large number of M.P.s' threatened to bring down the Government if the rights of individual liberties were not safegaurded.


I belive that the British found a solution. Wire tapping can only be authoritised by an independent judge upon the request by the Police. To leave this power in the hands of a Minister is dangerous. A minister may use it o pursue his or his parties poltical ends.

John A. Zammit

Nov 5th 2009, 18:39

I agree with J. Cordina. If I am not mistaken the Security Services Act makes it amply clear that before tapping a telephone the police/ security services need to have a warrant from the Minister responsible for the police. If, in this case they police/ security services have failed to follow the procedure prescribed by law, they have no one to blame but themselves; the laws are there to be observed by one and all.

Mr. Farrugia, people who like me are trained and have spent a lifetime in the criminal justice system go by the maxim that " It is better that one hundred guilty persons are set free than for a single innocent person to be found guilty" Incidently this maxin was coined by Maxillien Roberspierre when he resigned from his position as a magistrate. It is in persuance of this maxin that we have a criminal justice system, which has taken centuries to develop into what it is today, whose procedures must be followed by one and all.

wally vella-zarb

Nov 5th 2009, 18:08

@ J.Farrugia

"I rather see a dozen people hang than one hardened criminal free to kill, maim, rob mug etc"

Are you trying to demonstrate your warped 'logic' and sense of 'values'? At this stage I don't think that there are any of us left to persuade!

Joseph Camilleri

Nov 5th 2009, 17:58

@J.Farrugia
Your comment is typical of totalitarian states. Do you mean that you don't mind seeing a dozen innocent people hang - just to catch one criminal? One of these innocent victims could be yourself or a member of your family. Don't you mind that? I would turn your statement round: I would rather have a dozen criminals freed by the Courts than one innocent person convicted. The laws of the land and their correct interpretation are the only safeguard of the citizens against dictatorship. Read about Burma, Iran, North Korea, Nigeria and tens of other countries where the authorities act upon your statement.

D Zammit

Nov 5th 2009, 16:09

So J Farrugia feels just like the security branch that they are gods above the law and that they have the right to judge every one themselves.

Although the accused is a known criminal, then more and more should the police ensure that the law is observed by themselves in the first place to be sure that the right justice is made.

Now, thanks to their pride, this alleged criminal could go free. Thanks.

Joe Cordina

Nov 5th 2009, 16:03

This is a very thorny subject and should not be discussed emotionally. On the one hand we have the right to privacy which is enshrined in our Constitution. And on the other hand we have the need to curb serious crime. But how much of our freedom are we ready to give up to fight crime? Moreover what if wire tapping is then done on every tom dick and harry without justifiable cause? Let us not rush to conclusions please.

J Farrugia

Nov 5th 2009, 13:46

Yes Mr B Galea dont give an inch on our civil liberties. Let's open all the doors to all the criminals and then you will be the first to shout what is the police doing!!!!! Yes let's leave all legal jungle matters open to the criminals and then let the victims cry. I rather see a dozen people hang than one hardened criminal free to kill, maim, rob mug etc. What if they killed or raped yoru families?

B Galea

Nov 5th 2009, 13:19

Well done on the courts - we cannot afford to give away a single inch of our individual liberties. Rest assured that any liberties we cede to government will be gone for good - god forbid we to a Patriot Act state of affairs, where anything from our phone conversations to library book records can be secretly monitored, ostensibly for 'national security' reasons!