Ombudsman Joseph Said Pullicino yesterday said he disagrees with a court decision last month which said he went beyond his remit when he commented on matters concerning the judiciary.
Asked by Times of Malta to comment on the magistrate’s ruling, the former Chief Justice said he would respect it.
“We live on to fight another battle,” Dr Said Pullicino said. “I don’t agree with such a ruling.
“I just wanted to defend the Ombudsman Office’s position that it is within his remit to also comment on things that affect the justice system. However, we will carry on with the case which at its conclusion can also be appealed.”
He said the case will continue to examine if, as a common citizen, he has the right to comment on matters concerning the judiciary.
Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco, who recently relinquished his post of Malta Olympic Committee president, and another official, were mentioned by the International Olympic Committee in a probe by its Ethics Commission over the sale of Olympic Games tickets.
I just wanted to defend the Ombudsman Office’s position that it is within his remit to comment on things that affect the justice system
The investigation had started after a probe by undercover reporters of The Sunday Times of London, who posed as ticket agents and secretly recorded meetings they had.
The Ombudsman had sent a letter to the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice asking for the suspension of the judge until his impeachment case is decided.
Calling the revelations “shocking”, Dr Said Pullicino had said if the judge did not suspend himself, the Chief Justice should take action according to the powers conferred to him by law.
The Prime Minister had also initiated an impeachment motion against the judge so that Parliament could remove him from office.
During an ongoing hearing of a criminal libel case for defamation started by Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco against the former Chief Justice, Dr Said Pullicino raised a preliminary plea, arguing that, by law, criminal and civil proceedings cannot be taken against him because when he sent the letter he was acting in his capacity of Ombudsman.
However, last month, Magistrate Franco Depasquale ruled that the Ombudsman is precluded from pronouncing himself on matters concerning the judiciary and did not enjoy immunity.
Meanwhile, Times of Malta is informed that the Commission for the Administration of Justice is still deliberating whether there is a prima facie case of impeachment against Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco.
The motion has been discussed by the commission since December and has to establish whether, through his actions, the judge breached the judiciary’s code of ethics.
If the commission finds there is a case, the motion will be referred to Parliament to be discussed. A judge can be removed from office only with the backing of two-thirds of MPs.
According to the Code of Ethics, members of the judiciary are barred from holding any positions in sports associations, even on a voluntary basis.
Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco had already been publicly reprimanded over his position as President of the Malta Olympic Committee in 2008 but kept his position.
He stepped down from the role of MOC president last March.