In March 2011, more than 15 months ago, a man was caught on video viciously beating up a woman in the streets of St. Julians. The mobile video which was taken by a foreign student at about 2.30 a.m showed a drunken man beating up his girlfriend. He grabbed her viciously by her blouse whilst she crouched down trying to defend herself from his blows. He tugs at her almost undressing her. She screams, begs for help, and asks to be left alone but he slams her viciously against a car, throws her to the ground in the middle of the road, grabs her by the hair, kicks her, and hits her repeatedly.

The police painstakingly tracked the man down and took him to court, but, despite the gruelling evidence on video, because the victim decided to drop the charges of violence against her, the Magistrate could only fine him €175 for being drunk in public and offending public morals.

Déjà vu anyone?

Fast forward fifteen months to this week, and, not much has changed. Lo and behold, the story repeats itself albeit with a twist.

Five unruly men are caught on video and photographs, whilst attacking another man in Marsaxlokk. They punch him several times around the head and cause public unrest, but despite the indisputable evidence against them, despite one of them being within the operative period of a suspended sentence, because the victim dropped the violence charges and ‘forgave’ them, the court could only fine them €60 each for breaching the peace and swearing in public…essentially contraventions not crimes.

The St Julian’s incident had shocked Malta and caused public outrage. The video garnered thousands of views on YouTube, and the perpetrator had to fight tooth and limb to have it removed. The online comments fumed at our justice system - they called it silly, crippled and other flowery adjectives that I cannot reproduce here.

Amidst heated debates, the authorities had argued that their hands had been tied because the victim had dropped the charges of violence. They also argued however that had this been a case of domestic violence (i.e. had the couple been married or living together) the police could have prosecuted irrespective of the victim’s decision.

This time, in the Marsaxlokk case, it is being argued that the situation would have been different had the victim sustained grievous injuries (as opposed to slight), in which case, the police would have been able to proceed regardless of the victim’s forgiveness.  

If only this, if only that….all I see are legal loopholes favouring criminals and not protecting victims.

A disgusted citizen sent an email to Minister Chris Said to draw his attention to this farce. In his reply, Chris Said said that the Minister of Justice will not, and should not, interfere in court judgements.

Of course I cannot but agree to the full, but the Ministry (not Minister) of Justice should, if so convinced, work towards legal and legislative reforms that make such legal loopholes, impossible… ideally within my lifetime.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that victims are very often reduced to submission, and that out of fear of retribution many choose to drop the charges against their aggressors.  

So when citizens are caught breaking the law on video and photos, why is it necessary to have the victim’s consent to press charges?

When the victim’s testimony is not essential for the police to make a case, why wait for grievous injury before taking the bull by the horns?

When their testimony is not required, why not remove the onus of pressing charges from the victims, regardless of the gravity of the crime?

And when I’m verbally reprimanded for wearing a pair of sunglasses on my head whilst testifying in court, why are thugs like these not chastised for turning up in shorts and t-shirts?

The mind boggles.

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.