The Minister for Justice and Home Affairs has just presented a package of amendments to the Criminal Code for consideration by Parliament. It is a mixed bag, ranging from the introduction into Maltese law for the first time of environmental crimes to a greater emphasis on “reparative justice”, the attempt to motivate criminals to reform rather than simply punishing them severely.
The Attorney General will be given discretion to issue formal warnings to first-time offenders caught with drugs for their own personal use. A “Drugs Court” similar to the Family Court will also be set up.
The courts will be granted authority to assign community work to those given suspended sentences. The minimum age of criminal responsibility will be raised from nine to 14 years and legislation concerning the age of consent will be “slightly tweaked”.
Homophobic intent will be treated with the same importance as racism under the law, with criminal acts motivated by homophobia receiving a tougher sentence.
Moreover, a number of proposals are made to improve the administration of justice. Agreed sentencing, whereby defence and prosecution can agree on a proposed sentence, is to be entrenched into court procedures. The Chief Justice will be given more flexibility in the running of the courts. He will, inter alia, have the power to delegate specialised work to different court sections.
Regulations dealing with fireworks licences will become tougher and there will be harsher sentences for attacks on public officials, human trafficking, prostitution, vandalism of graves and public monuments, “anti-democratic crimes”, corruption and racketeering.
A “criminal assets bureau” to combat money laundering will be set up.
Two proposals that have nothing to do with criminal law have also been thrown into the mix. One concerns amendments to the Immigration Act and the other is the idea of transforming the Malta Police Association into a union, albeit with no power of industrial action.
While any effort, however small, to improve matters is welcome what is being proposed seems to be far from getting anywhere near putting the courthouse in order. It may be a move in the right direction but, as this newspaper has repeatedly pointed out, the administration of justice is creaking.
Morale in the judiciary is low. The conditions of service in the law courts are poor. The backlog of cases is just too high. There are question marks about the calibre of some magistrates and judges and the ability to attract the right people to serve on the Bench. And the Commission for the Administration of Justice is neither here nor there.
Nationalist MP Franco Debono, himself a criminal lawyer, has proved a thorn in the minister’s – and the government’s – side. He has called on the House to address long-standing problems in the administration of justice and the police.
He has declared that “The Criminal Code amendments... don’t get to the heart of the problems”. He suggested that there should be a “national conference” bringing together all the key stakeholders to find ways of tackling the problems instead of “just paying lip-service and providing superficial solutions. The system needs to be treated in a holistic way.”
While a public discussion of the kind proposed would help, it cannot be the final answer. It should instead be the scene-setter to a comprehensive assessment of every aspect of the judiciary by a high-powered commission of inquiry made up of the most experienced legal minds and administrators available. The matter is urgent.