[attach id=221212 size="large"]Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi[/attach]

The Commission for the Administration of Justice has begun impeachment proceedings against Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco, The Times has learnt.

Sources close to the Office of the President yesterday confirmed that the Commission had an unscheduled meeting on Monday, during which the impeachment motion presented to Parliament last Saturday by Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi was discussed at length.

During the meeting, in which all members of the Commission except President George Abela took part, the methodology and timeframes on this impeachment process were discussed together with the next steps.

According to the sources, the Commission has  communicated with the judge involved, informing him officially about the impeachment motion and its contents.

The Commission has invited Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco to submit his comments and reactions and to prepare his defence.

“The judge, who is under investigation by the Commission, is expected to present his version in writing,” the sources said.

“He may also choose to appear in front of the Commission’s members together with his lawyers and all the other witnesses he deems fit to defend his case.”

According to the law, the Justice Commission is only bound to make a recommendation to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. The final decision on whether to remove a member of the judiciary from the bench can only be taken after a vote in Parliament supported by two-thirds of MPs.

Although the Commission, whose meetings are held behind closed doors, is not bound by any timeframes, the sources said that all members are conscious the clock is ticking.

“Both the dissolution of Parliament and the commencement of court work are scheduled for January 7. We cannot imagine that Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco can continue to hear and decide cases with a pending impeachment motion,” a seasoned lawyer told The Times yesterday.

Although Parliament may be dissolved before the recommendation of the Commission, the Prime Minister has already said he is prepared to call an extraordinary session of Parliament even after January 7 to determine on this motion.

The Constitution allows for this possibility. Opposition leader Joseph Muscat has said he will abide by the conclusions of the Commission.

According to the law, the Commission will recommend impeachment if it finds there is a prima facie case. If this is not the case the impeachment motion falls.

The impeachment motion against Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco was moved by the Prime Minister last Saturday after the judge and MOC general secretary Joe Cassar were rapped by the International Olympic Committee in an investigation over the sale of Olympic tickets earlier this year.

The investigation started after a probe by undercover reporters of The Sunday Times of London, who filmed a conversation with the two men after posing as ticket agents seeking to circumvent the official ticketing mechanism.

Mr Farrugia Sacco has also received several warnings over his dual role as president of the Malta Olympic Committee and a member of the Bench – which contravenes the judiciary’s code of ethics.

Soon after the Prime Minister’s call for Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco to “do the honourable thing” and resign from the bench to be able to defend his name without tarnishing the reputation of the judiciary, the judge said the Prime Minister was “trying to be funny”.

This is the third time that Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco has faced Commission proceedings.

In 2005, he was accused of breaching the code of ethics when taking over the role of president of St Joseph Band club in Ħamrun. In 2008, after refusing to resign as president of the MOC, the Commission publicly censured the judge and called for his immediate resignation from his role in the sports organisation.

In an unprecedented move, the Commission had published a letter to the judge in which he was told that, so long as he kept his post, he was in breach of the code of ethics.

Despite this warning, the judge insisted on retaining both posts and in 2009 contested the post of MOC president again.

In both cases, George Abela, who served as a lawyer before his appointment as President, had defended the judge before the Commission. Due to this conflict of interest, he has withdrawn from the Commission on this case.

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.