The judiciary watchdog has decided to forge ahead with impeachment hearings against Mr Justice Lino Farrugia Sacco, in spite of lawyers’ arguments that the motion filed against him had effectively expired.
The case before the Commission for the Administration of Justice was triggered by a motion of impeachment filed in December by the former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, after the judge, who at the time headed the Malta Olympic Committee (MOC), became embroiled in a controversy over the sale of tickets for the London Olympics.
After the general election, lawyers questioned whether the impeachment hearings stood, given the parliamentary motion that triggered them would normally be considered to have expired since Parliament had been dissolved.
However, conflicting legal advice was given to the Government on this point.
Some lawyers argued that the motion stood on the basis of public interest while others were of the opinion that the motion was no different to any other so had therefore expired – and with it the impeachment process.
The commission, however, deliberated the question in recent weeks and decided to proceed with the case, sources close to it told The Sunday Times of Malta.
Parliament has the ultimate say over whether to sack a judge, with a two-thirds majority required.
However, the commission is tasked with deliberating whether there are grounds for impeachment and making its recommendations to the House of Representatives.
Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, who at the time was in Opposition, had said that the Labour party would follow the recommendations of the commission and vote accordingly.
The process against Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco was initiated after he was rapped by the International Olympic Committee in June 2012 following an investigation over the sale of Olympic tickets by The Sunday Times of London.
The judge had been president of the Malta Olympic Committee since 1999, defying calls by the judiciary watchdog to step down as his position in the sports organisation was deemed incompatible with his judicial role and breached the code of ethics.
He decided not to stand for re-election at the MOC when the position was up for confirmation in March.
However, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco has challenged the basis of impeachment proceedings, arguing that he had not been censured by the Olympic Committee, and slammed the International Olympics Committee ethics committee’s report.
The judge also filed a constitutional case stating that the presence of two members of the judiciary watchdog – retired judge Victor Caruana Colombo and Chamber of Advocates president Reuben Balzan – could undermine his right to a fair hearing.
mmicallef@timesofmalta.com