A Maltese judge sitting on the European Court of Human Rights has disagreed with a judgment that held that Maltese law’s failure to stipulate punishment was in breach of a convicted drug trafficker’s rights.
Mr Justice Lawrence Quintano wrote a partly dissenting opinion on the judgment, saying not having these provisions enshrined in law did not amount to a breach of the man’s human rights.
Mr Justice Quintano was replacing Mr Justice Vincent De Gaetano, who was unable to sit in the case.
The European court awarded €6,000 compensation – including €5,000 to cover court expenses – to John Camilleri, who had complained there was no law stipulating in which court a drug trafficking case would be heard.
The Attorney General can choose whether someone is tried before the Magistrates’ Court or the Criminal Court.
Mr Camilleri had been convicted over the possession of nearly 1,000 ecstasy pills and sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment and a €35,000 fine.
He took his case to the ECHR, complaining about the absence of legal provisions on the punishment bracket – between six months and 10 years if tried in the Magistrates’ Court and four years to life if tried in the Criminal Court.
The European Court upheld his complaint, finding there was a violation of Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which stipulates that no one shall receive punishment heavier than the one he deserves.
In his dissenting opinion, Mr Justice Quintano said an accused person could have easily foreseen the punishment by considering the quantity of drugs in his possession, by seeking legal advice, which was available to him, and by considering case law handed down by both courts.
“(Mr Camilleri) was caught with 953 ecstasy pills in December 2001 and case law was abundant enough for (him) to be aware that, with or without reading the law, being caught in possession of 953 pills would mean proceedings before the Criminal Court.
“It can definitely be said that by 2001, such a quantity of ecstasy would automatically mean the higher brackets indicated in the law,” Mr Justice Quintano said.
Referring to the recommendations of the Maltese Constitutional Court for refinements in the law, Mr Justice Quintano said this did not necessarily mean the convention had been violated. Had it been so, the Constitutional Court would have found a violation but it found none at all, he said.