The failure of the criminal courts to grant bail to a man who stands charged with drug importation and trafficking was yesterday declared by the First Hall of the Civil Court to be in violation of the man's fundamental human rights.

Mr Justice Tonio Mallia delivered this judgment following a constitutional application filed by foreign national Paschalino Cefai against the Attorney General.

Mr Cefai, who is married to a Maltese woman, told the court that he was arraigned before the Magistrates Court last March on charges of importation and trafficking of cocaine, cannabis and heroin.

He had repeatedly asked to be released on bail but his requests were constantly denied. Mr Cefai had filed four requests for release on bail before the Magistrates Court and another four before the Criminal Court.

The criminal courts had refused bail on the basis that there was a fear he would abscond because of the seriousness of the crimes with which he had had been charged.

Mr Justice Mallia declared that an accused person was entitled to bail unless there were certain dangers.

These, according to law, were the danger that an accused person would not appear before the courts or that he would abscond from the country. The dangers included the possibility that an accused person would not obey court orders or that he would tamper with the collection of evidence.

The limitations of the right to bail were not, of themselves, a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of the individual. The courts had to see whether the refusal of bail was reasonable and necessary in the light of all the circumstances of the case.

Case law of the European Court of Human Rights had found that continued detention could be justified only if there were specific indications of a genuine requirement of public interest which, notwithstanding the presumption of innocence, outweighed the right to individual liberty.

Mr Cefai had certainly been charged with very serious crimes and his temporary detention without bail was not unreasonable.

However, last July, the prosecution had declared that it had no further evidence to produce, and Mr Cefai had still remained in preventive custody. Eight months had lapsed since Mr Cefai's arraignment and the court found that there no longer existed valid reasons for him to be denied bail.

The court, therefore, concluded that Mr Cefai's continued detention after the lapse of eight months was in violation of his fundamental human rights.

Mr Justice Mallia added that there was no need for the court to provide for financial remuneration.

It was sufficient that Mr Cefai could once again apply for bail before the appropriate court of criminal jurisdiction.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.