Absence of lawyer did not violate murderer’s rights

Lack of assistance by a lawyer during a police interrogation did not, of itself, constitute a breach of an accused person’s fundamental human right to a fair trial, a court ruled yesterday.

Madam Justice Anna Felice delivered the judgment following a constitutional application filed by John Attard against the Prime Minister and the Attorney General.

Mr Attard is serving a life sentence after he and Joseph Farrugia were found guilty, in a trial by jury in November 2010, of the murder of warden Fortunata Spiteri in Gozo in August 2001.

Mr Attard complained that he had not been assisted by a lawyer when he was interrogated in September 2002. This, he claimed, was a violation of his fundamental human right to a fair trial.

Madam Justice Felice said the Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights protected the right to a fair trial. The court had therefore to examine not only whether the accused was assisted by a lawyer but whether the lack of legal assistance could impinge on the right to a fair trial and whether there was the danger that the accused might be found guilty if he was innocent.

If no such danger resulted then there was no violation of the right to a fair hearing.

The court had to examine the whole criminal process undergone by the accused and not merely the interrogation stage.

Mr Attard had made two statements to the police. On both occasions he had been duly warned that he was not obliged to answer any questions.

It also resulted that Mr Attard’s attitude during his interrogation had been such that, at times, it seemed as though it was he who was interrogating the police officers and not vice versa. He had not been put at a disadvantage during his interrogation, the court said.

He had also confirmed his statements before the inquiring magistrate when he had explained his involvement in the murder.

The court could neither ignore the fact that other witnesses had testified against Mr Attard. The statement of Mr Farrugia, who had died before the trial was held, had also been read out.

Mr Attard’s inability to cross-examine Mr Farrugia was not the fault of the prosecution, said the court, and this too did not result in a violation of his human rights.

The court dismissed the constitutional application.