Judge Lino Farrugia Sacco has claimed a violation of his fundamental human rights resulting from the fact that he was not officially notified of the fresh impeachment motion filed against him in Parliament.

The failure of the Commission for the Administration of Justice (CAJ) to notify him before it considered the motion breached the law governing the commission, he argued yesterday in a judicial protest.

As a result, he was not given the opportunity to defend himself, in violation of his fundamental right to a fair hearing.

The protest was filed against Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, who moved the motion, the Attorney General, the commission and Opposition Leader Simon Busuttil.

A judge facing impeachment should be notified of the accusations and given the opportunity to present a written declaration

His lawyers also argued in the protest that the principle of natural justice had been broken when the commission which took a decision on the first impeachment motion proceeded to decide on the second.

At the end of January, Speaker of the House Anġlu Farrugia ruled that the original impeachment motion filed by former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi in 2012 was “dead” as it had been filed during a previous legislature by a person who was no longer an MP and had never made it to Parlia-ment’s agenda.

As a result, Dr Muscat moved a fresh motion and this, according to law, was forwarded to the commission for investigation.

A few days later, the commission wrote back to the Speaker saying its position was the same as that taken on the original motion – that there was prima facie proven misbehaviour by the judge when he stayed on as president of the Malta Olympic Committee.

His lawyers – his own sons David and Steven as well as former judge Philip Sciberras and the judge’s son Alex – argued that according to the law regulating the commission, filing a new impeachment motion required it to investigate the matter and report back to Parliament with the outcome of the investigation and its recommendation.

The same laws laid down that a judge facing impeachment should be notified of the accusations and given the opportunity to present a written declaration, he held. Not only was Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco not given the opportunity to do this but he had not even been notified of the contents of the new motion, the lawyers said, adding that the Commission had acted as a prosecutor and judge in this case.

Moreover, Mr Justice Farrugia Sacco had on four occasions raised the validity of Dr Gonzi’s original motion before the CAJ but these had fallen on deaf ears. The judicial protest was also sent to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and Parliamentary Secretary for Justice Owen Bonnici. The House Business Committee is due to meet tomorrow to discuss how the impeachment process will proceed in Parliament.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.