Recording police interrogations ‘not a priority’
The recording of police interrogations is not a priority for the government, which is focusing on other issues, such as the duration of court cases, Justice Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said.
His comments come in the wake of a chorus of calls from criminal lawyers for police interrogations to be recorded in the interests of both the suspects and the officers.
Although he did not say whether he agreed with the suggestion, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said this was not a priority for the government “right now”.
When the argument was put to him that the present situation could expose the police force to all sorts of allegations by suspects, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said: “Allegations of police wrongdoing are always allegations. I am confident we have a good team of magistrates who can weigh these allegations and decide accordingly.”
The most recent such claims came from former Sliema mayor Nikki Dimech who said he was forced to sign a statement under psychological “duress”. He claimed the police withheld medication he needed for chronic panic attacks and asthma, which he suffers from.
Police Inspector Angelo Gafà vehemently denied the claims but admitted under cross-examination during Mr Dimech’s court case he did not record any of the interrogations in which the former mayor released conflicting statements.
The police only recorded interrogations that involved very serious crimes, he told court. Mr Dimech is charged with corruption.
Amendments to the Criminal Code in 2009 introduced the right for suspects to consult their lawyer for up to one hour before being questioned by the police.
Here, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said he was amenable to taking stock of how this right was working in practice but insisted there was more important work to be focussed on than the recording of interrogations. “We should look at this amendment and see how it is working and where it needs to be fine-tuned,” he said.
His ministry’s two main priorities in the coming year should be a shorter and speedier legal process and a stronger legal position for victims of crime, he insisted.
Improvements in both these targeted areas would be welcome but the call made by a swathe of criminal lawyers over the past weeks has been supported by MPs from both sides of the House who have joined the list of those who feel recording police interrogations is a fundamental matter.
“I most certainly agree that police interrogations should be recorded. I feel such an amendment would ensure better administration of justice,” Labour MP Josè Herrera said.
He said that throughout his 24 years’ experience as a criminal lawyer, he had several clients who would say the statement drawn up by the police did not reflect what they had said or meant to say. Others would say they would have been unduly pressured into making a statement.
He criticised the government for having pushed forward legislation favouring police prosecutions by overriding traditional lines of defence.
“When one speaks of having a strong prosecuting office and a strong investigating police force, one should not mean that we should arrive at this end by weakening the possibilities of a sound legal defence. At times, I feel that the scales of justice are starting to favour the prosecution too much,” he said.
The police already have some facilities for recording interrogations but not enough. PN backbencher Franco Debono said the police had six set-ups for audio recording but no equipment for the video recording of interrogations.
He stressed that the recording of interrogations should complement the safeguards afforded by the recently-introduced right of legal advice. Suspects are allowed to speak to a lawyer before an interrogation. Dr Debono insisted such assistance should be during the actual interrogation.
“One can contemplate mandatory recording. However, even in the absence of mandatory requirements, courts should apply the best evidence rule in cases where a confession is being contested and give weight to the fact that the police failed to present the best evidence available. In this manner, investigating officers would be aware that lack of recording could seriously jeopardise their case,” he said.
Dr Debono said he had already spoken in Parliament about the need to reconsider the whole investigative set-up, including appointing magistrates with an exclusive investigative function, rather than having the same magistrate conducting inquiries and deciding cases.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
27 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Charles Micallef
Oct 15th 2010, 12:34
Police interview recordings are part of the democratic process
in most democratic countries.
Why not in Malta?
Alfred Bugeja
Oct 15th 2010, 11:28
Seems that everyone in here is interested more in giving more rights to criminal suspects (that invariably include a high proportion of criminals who would eventually be found guilty in court) rather than giving priority to the fight against crime. All this without sparing a thought for the victims of crime (which is what to Minister said he will be focusing on next year).
Its as if everyone believes that society would be better off with a higher crime rate and a toothless police force.
The world must truly be coming to an end.
David Caruana
Oct 15th 2010, 12:17
Toothless police force?!?! On whose payroll are you Mr.Bugeja?
Having interrogations recorded does not make the police toothless but will only make sure that no irregularities have been done during the interrogations. If the police have nothing to hide, why all this resistance?
I'm not surprised that this is not a priority for the Government - we always knew that transparency and fairness are not its strongest points.
C Gatt
Oct 15th 2010, 12:35
Mr Bugeja seems to think that the end justifies the means. However a bad police system does not reduce crime on the street. Rather it risks miscarriages of justice. The doubts surrounding the recent DCG libel case, for example, do not increase confidence in the police force.
If the papers reported him correctly, Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said recently that what happens in Europe and the rest of the world is not necessarily relevant to Malta. I am beginning to understand his thinking. His ministry is becoming a receptacle for some very interesting decisions. An anti-pornography law that threatens harsh jail terms on writers, human right issues which are dealt with by issuing glib sound bites, a questionable irregular immigrant policy that leaves people in subhuman conditions. And now this!
Protecting victims is necessarily a priority, especially if these victims are being 'victimised' by the police. otherwise as Juvenalis once said: quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Alfred Bugeja
Oct 15th 2010, 14:00
@ david caruana
I am on the payroll of those who had their car stolen or broken into three times in two years like me. I speak for the elderly persons who are terrorised to live alone for fear of being beaten up for 20 Euros.
The criminal suspects you support have had one in their favour earlier this year when they were given the right of access to a lawyer before interrogation. It's time to think more about those who, like me, done nothing wrong but ended up being the victims of the criminals you want protected.
There's already too much political correctness of the kind you want in this country.
Glenn Travers
Oct 15th 2010, 14:49
@ Mr Bugeja. What if the person being interrogated did nothing wrong? Your assumption that all people being interogated are guilty is unsound and dangerous. As someone else said, if the police have nothing to hide, what do they fear? Also it protects the police from malicious aligations. Above all it is the right thing to do
C Gatt
Oct 15th 2010, 15:01
@Alfred Bugeja. To quote Benjamin Franklin: "Those who are willing to give up a little freedom for a little security, wind up with neither freedom, nor security".
David Caruana
Oct 15th 2010, 16:10
What a contorted way of thinking! Who said I'm supporting criminals?!
I support the innocent - and all suspects are innocent until proven guilty in court.
If we have to use your same line of thinking, then you are supporting the corrupt police who abuse of their power!
Alfred Bugeja
Oct 15th 2010, 17:13
@ David Caruana
Your thinking is warped too because victims of crime are innocent as well. The political correctness you advocate puts victims at risk more than it puts at risk those who are suspected of having committed a crime.
And lest you forget, there are the law courts to judge if "corrupt police" abused their power or not. There is a substantial amount of case law in that regard, and officers have been convicted in the past.
David Caruana
Oct 15th 2010, 18:58
"The political correctness you advocate puts victims at risk more than it puts at risk those who are suspected of having committed a crime. " This is plain baseless scaremongering. Please explain how political correctness, or a fair and just (and recorded) interrogation pose a risk to victims. We'd all appreciate if you could also back your claims with some studies or even articles.
Paul Mifsud
Oct 15th 2010, 11:22
Has a suspect the right ask for an interrogation to be recorded?
Olina Tretyak
Oct 15th 2010, 11:21
Dr. Carm Mifsud Bonnici, there can not be priorities. What would you prefer, to stay in a long queue to a grosser to be given rotten vegs in the end, or get the rotten vegs fast?
Besides being efficient, service must be proper.
In interrogations it is important not only what words were printed as questions and answers, but also how suspect reacted on questions.
Police must be well trained to know what exactly they are allowed to do to get the confession. They must know if they are allowed to lie, manipulate, threaten to convince a suspect to confess. Without a proper training of interrogators each recorded interrogation would be challenged by the lawyer for breaking the rules of interrogations and/or using wrong methods.
I am for professionalism in every sphere, I am for well trained Police, for independed fair Judges and for video recorded interrogations.
Leon Scerri
Oct 15th 2010, 11:21
“Allegations of police wrongdoing are always allegations. I am confident we have a good team of magistrates who can weigh these allegations and decide accordingly.”
While I underline the fact that we have good magistrates, lawyers and police officers who carry out their role in an exemplary manner, I must also emphasize the fact, and this is a well known fact, that there are magistrates, lawyers and police officers who are fraudulent and deceitful; and that’s putting it mildly.
These hardened and untouchable characters are wrecking havoc in our judicial system, hence the antagonistic attitude of the man in the street towards the prevailing state of affairs! It is very easy for the top brass to dwell on the good aspects of our system and brush aside completely the mavericks who in fact are mocking the powers that be, apart from the aggrieved unsuspecting individuals who fall prey to their machinations! Isn’t this one of the reason why they are having a field day! The moral will to stop them in their track is missing and they know it!
That's why they prevail.
Franco Farrugia
Oct 15th 2010, 11:08
I think it is in the interest of the citizens as well as of the Police Force that police interrogrations are recorded and I think that the Minister is wrong in saying it is 'not a priority'. IT IS a priority and the Minister should also remember the perception of the Police with the public, when the Police is under accusation. Yes, I think that recoring of police interrogrations ARE a priority, and how!
Ronald Cauchi
Oct 15th 2010, 11:01
Of course "recording police interrogations is not a priority. Since when have civil rights and liberties been a priority for this government? It's far more convenient to keep the Police Force happy at the expense of the ordinary citizens' rights and freedoms.
NIGEL CASSAR
Oct 15th 2010, 10:48
You people only see the bad things of the police not the good things i am very happy with our Police Force we Suod thank them 4 our saftey.We do we have to insault the police all the time we NEVER THANK THEM 4 DOIND THIER JOB AND THATS IT.GOOD JOB POLICE I AM HAPPY WITH YOUR WORK MOSTLY THE TRAFFIC SECTION
Mark Borg
Oct 15th 2010, 10:24
Operating a tape recorder must be such a drain on resources, jahasra.
Albert Farrugia
Oct 15th 2010, 10:22
Kompli ghattilhom lill-pulizija Sur Karm....vera prosit eh!
Miguel Micallef
Oct 15th 2010, 10:19
The police do not want to implement this basic procedure because they will need to train every single one of them as a real police man. No more bullying around to make people confess. This will surely be a nightmare for them - having to do real work.
Marcel Dingli
Oct 15th 2010, 10:13
Well, the Police prosecuted me twice with invented accusations. Twice NOT GUILTY of all charges. Besides of infringing my right to private property and hindering my political activity. They made me lose over Euros 50,000 in wages plus other damages and legal expenses. I have a good mind to sue, however court cases need lawyers and that means money. Li jkissru n nies mhux priorita ghall MInistru !! Ghandkomx il wicc tigu titolbuni l vot ukoll !
R.Bugeja
Oct 15th 2010, 10:43
il qazba ma icaqcaqx ghal xejn siehbi!!
tomas borg
Oct 15th 2010, 11:16
for what? you made us interested in the story
Marcel Dingli
Oct 15th 2010, 13:11
Any one who wants to hear a couple of stories can e mail me on dinglimarcel@hotmail.com. I cannot use anmarceldingli@yahoo.com as this address is blocked (min jaf ghaliex hux ) for out going messages. Anglu and Josie spent hundreds of thousands to try and have some decency on this island, imma mur fehmu il gahan Malti !
Mike farrugia
Oct 15th 2010, 10:09
I do understand the problem a government faces when it has to decide whether to build a school or build a new hospital wing.
But the solution to this problem is a simple € 500 camcorder. I cannot understand why the minister has to decide if the police should go for Sony, Panasonic, Canon or JVC!
M. Vella
Oct 15th 2010, 13:07
It's not that simple:
You will need:
A high definition camera (perhaps two or more cameras to capture various angles)
A proper dedicate storage room (to store all recording safely at the right temperature and atmospheric conditions),
A guard to keep watch of the items inside (24Hrs a day - to make sure that recordings do not suddenly 'disappear' just before a court hearing),
Proper backup facilities
and so on
Nevertheless I hope that this system is implemented soon.
Joseph Dingli
Oct 15th 2010, 10:06
So corruption isn't a serious crime then?
J. Borg
Oct 15th 2010, 09:51
Oh how convenient dear Minister and Commissioner....
It seems your priorities are:
Arresting young ladies carrying a tiny dog in their bag at the beach;
Prosecuting students who refresh themselves by swimming naked at 3 am, or walking around in their boxer shorts;
Prosecuting an author and publisher for distributing a saucy write-up at University;
Prosecuting carnival revellers for daring to dress up as priests, nuns, or point out a funny side of relegion;
Covering up naked PLASTIC manikins notwithstanding the message they were sending;
Prosecuting a mayor for letting his daughter use the council's laptop, whilst Ministers enjoy freebies from big business;
Do us all a favour.....and give utmost proirity to your resignation, as the police are losing credibility and more!