A judge ruled that a convicted drug trafficker’s human rights were breached by the wide discretionary powers enjoyed by the Attorney General, but found there was no room for a remedy.

Mario Camilleri, known as l-Imniehru, had been charged with trafficking in heroin and is awaiting trial by jury over the case that dates back to 2007.

He filed a constitutional application arguing that the right of the Attorney General to decide on the maximum punishment he could face breached his human rights.

He explained that under Maltese law the Attorney General had complete discretion to decide in which court to hear a drug trafficking case and, therefore, the punishment that would apply.

If an accused is tried in the Magistrates’ Court he faces a prison term ranging between six months and 10 years. The Criminal Court, however, can impose a jail term ranging between four years and life.

The Attorney General insisted he was not the person deciding what punishment to give because he did not pass judgment, adding that the accused knew exactly what sort of punishment he faced when a case started.

He said he could not even remotely see how the law governing the Attorney General’s discretionary powers could encroach on the independence of the court.

Madam Justice Anna Felice referred to a decision by the European Court of Human Rights, which found that Maltese law did not provide any guidance on the matter and this was in breach of the right not to be punished without laws being in place.

Quoting from case law, the judge ruled that although Mr Camilleri’s rights had been breached, there was no room for a remedy because the breach was minimal.

The trial, Madam Justice Felice said, should go ahead notwithstanding the demand.