Justice Minister aims to give courts more dignity

Justice Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici yesterday categorically denied it had ever been his intention to dismantle the courts. All he wanted to do was to give them more dignity.

Winding up the debate in second reading of the Bill amending legislation relating to arbitration and mediation, the minister said that people were interested in solving disputes through legal mechanisms which did not take long to decide. One could not go back to re-introducing the Commercial Court, but efficiency dictated that disputes be solved in a reasonable amount of time.

Cases which merited to be addressed to magistrates and judges did not necessarily mean that even small litigations had to go to court. The courts would be in a better position to hear cases of a constitutional nature, and others which involved legal complexities and large amounts of money. According to Dr Mifsud Bonnici, this was a culture change.

The arbitration centre had functioned well since amendments had been introduced. As a result, 141 voluntary arbitration cases had been instituted. International arbitration cases had also increased. Mandatory arbitration had led lawyers to advise their clients to settle disputes through arbitration centres. This showed that litigations could be solved out of court.

Minister Mifsud Bonnici said that since amendments had come into force 19,000 new cases had been filed at the Small Claims Tribunal and 17,000 other cases had been presented through the executive official letter. Mediation procedures had also led to solving disputes in a relatively short time. Many cases involving pique could be handled by the mediation centre.

One could arrive at settling international disputes through arbitration and mediation if the arbitration centre gained experience on a national basis. The arbitration tribunal had settled 14 international cases in a short period of time and at a relatively small expense.

Administrative tribunals were necessary for minor cases including disputes arising from many traffic accidents.

Dr Mifsud Bonnici accepted Dr Josè Herrera's proposal on the qualifications needed for the appointment of judges. He said that a lawyer did not necessarily have to have 12 years' court experience to qualify for appointment as a judge, although this would be considered an asset.

Concluding, the minister said that the justice sector could be further strengthened through greater collaboration and agreement with the opposition.

Earlier, Beppe Fenech Adami (PN) said that the Bill should be seen from the perspective of legal progress in the judiciary and the administration of justice. People who had the right to a remedy were being discouraged rather than encouraged to seek remedies. But the government was committed to looking after the rules of natural justice, which involved impartiality and fair trial.

The judicial system was taking too long in deciding cases. The introduction of the judicial letter for debts not exceeding Lm10,000 was a successful measure. Certain people used to abuse by not paying their creditors, because creditors might be discouraged to seek remedies, as court proceedings could take too long.

Dr Fenech Adami said that there were also improvements in the system of judicial sale. While a case might have been concluded, there were several complicated procedures that resulted in a judicial sale taking months or years to be conducted.

Today, to have a bill of exchange was considered as if one had cash in one's hands. Until some time ago, it was not possible to enforce a bill of exchange if one did not have a court judgment.

Turning to the Small Claims Tribunal, Dr Fenech Adami said that such a tribunal did not have the many formalities needed in courts, because it dealt with small claims. This tribunal decided cases without lengthy procedures. It was a system that was working efficiently.

There was also a considerable change with regard to the relation between justice and IT. The ministry had created a website, which was a very important tool for lawyers because they could trace their cases.

Concluding, Dr Fenech Adami said that one of the main advantages of the amendments was that it would now be possible to appeal from decisions of the Arbitration Centre both on point of fact and on point of law.

Joe Falzon (PN) agreed with the minister and with Dr Fenech Adami on the importance of strengthening the judicial system.

It was unfortunate that claims took a long time to be decided, and the proposed structure would resolve the injustice of delay in resolving cases. The legislator had put these structures on a high level, and this would instil trust in people's perception of arbitration and mediation. There was a lack of knowledge on the possibilities of arbitration, and people still thought that the only way to obtain justice was through the courts.

Turning to contracts between developers and property owners, Mr Falzon said people asked about the remedies available in disputes. The present situation was that an arbitration clause was inserted wherein parties agreed beforehand that, if disputes arose, they would revert to arbitration.

Mr Falzon said that amicable settlements were being safeguarded. The amendments instilled trust in the judicial system, making people see that justice was seen to be done.

The Bill was unanimously approved.