A judge ordered the release on bail of a man charged with conspiracy to import drugs, saying the €10,000 deposit imposed upon him violated his fundamental human rights.
Mr Justice Anthony Ellul heard that, in November 2008, Jonathan Attard, together with another man, Zeba Moussa, had appeared before the Magistrates’ Court charged with conspiracy to import cocaine.
Mr Attard was detained in preventive custody because he could not afford to pay the bail deposit imposed upon him.
In March 2009, the Magistrates’ Court had ruled that Mr Attard could be released on bail against a deposit of €23,330. Following an application by Mr Attard, the sum was reduced to €15,000, then to €12,000 and, finally, €10,000. However, Mr Attard did not have the money and, so, remained in custody.
The court noted that Mr Attard was raising two children as a single parent. His lawyer had also confirmed in court that he had no funds to pay the bail deposit.
Mr Justice Ellul said this case demonstrated the need for an overhaul of the system applied when setting bail conditions.
European Court of Human Rights case law established that one would assume that an accused person should be released on bail because such person had to be presumed innocent until he was convicted.
The setting of bail conditions did not depend only on the seriousness of the crime. The court would also have to take into account the character of the person involved, his morals, his home, his occupation, his assets, his family ties and all kinds of links with the country in which he was being prosecuted.
Mr Justice Ellul had no doubt that Mr Attard could not afford to pay the sum of €10,000 imposed upon him as a condition for bail.
Mr Attard had availed himself of the facilities available to him in prison to further his education and showed enthusiasm for learning.
The judge found no need for Mr Attard to be kept in preventive custody and so ordered his release on bail without the need to pay €10,000.
Imposing the deposit of such a sum as a bail condition was declared to be in violation of Mr Attard’s fundamental human rights.