Decision on Chris Said reappointment to be taken after appeal period expires - PM

Updated - Adds Prime Minister's comments

Chris Said was cleared of perjury charges by a Magistrates' Court today, but the Prime Minister said a decision on whether or not he will be reappointed Parliamentary Secretary will only be taken once the appeal period provided by law expires.

Dr Said had resigned his post as Parliamentary Secretary on September 23 after a court ordered the Police to institute perjury proceedings against him in connection with a child custody case in which he had appeared as legal counsel to the mother.

At the time when Dr Said resigned, Dr Gonzi said he looked forward to being able to reappoint Dr Said.

According to law the parties in this case have four working days within which to appeal the court's decision.

On October 4, Dr Said testified and pleaded not guilty to lying under oath during the child custody case that happened last year.

The lawyer representing Anthony Xuereb, who is the baby’s father, had told The Times that this was not a personal vendetta but a necessary step in his battle to regain custody of his only child. Mr Xuereb alleged Dr Said lied under oath to hide a legal move he employed when he replaced a court application for custody with an identical one submitted to a different magistrate in January 2007.

But Dr Said insisted he would have acted in the same way, even if he had known it would lead to such personal trouble for him because he was defending the right of a mother whose child was taken away from her just weeks after birth. He stressed he had no motive to lie because he was simply relaying facts, which could have been verified through court records. He had simply made a mistake.

In her judgement today, Magistrate Edwin Grima said that there was 'absolutely nothing in Chris Said's testimony which one could remotely say was a lie or that he had been incorrect."

"In the opinion of this court, whatever Chris Said said in court was correct."

It was evident, the court said, that Dr Said's testimony had no influence on the decision taken by the presiding magistrate in the child custody case.

Magistrate Grima said that the court had decided to award custody of the child to the mother and not to Mr Xuereb because Mr Xuereb did not know how to reach a compromise. Dr Said's testimony had nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, it was clear that Dr Said's intention was to assist the parties and to answer questions put to him. There was no evidence which indicated that Dr Said intentionally and maliciously failed to mention facts of the case.

The judgement in full can be seen on

http://www.justiceservices.gov.mt/courtservices/Judgements/script_get_judgement_document.aspx?CaseJudgementID=63778