“From where, and how, the newspaper got the information was not relevant to the case because investigative journalism should always be protected even if there are mistakes in the reporting.”

This is, I consider, the most relevant part of a sentence by the Court of Appeal on March 28, in a case instituted by Lawrence Pullicino, the ex-Police Commissioner, against me as editor of Il-Mument.

Pullicino had instituted a civil suit against me over an article in the edition of April 27, 1997 in which we gave details about how he was being given preferential treatment at the Corradino Corrective Facility, having been imprisoned in March 1993 for complicity in the death of Nardu Debono.

We revealed that Pullicino was being allowed to make telephone calls whenever he wanted to, was allowed to approach a prison gate that led to the outside of the compound, and that despite not working at the bakery or kitchen he was allowed out of his cell at the same time as inmates who did.

Despite not working, he benefited from increased prison visits usually allowed to working inmates and he used an office to give consultancy to the government (Labour) in connection with the building of a new prison at Mtaħleb.

During the court proceedings I testified that what we published were true facts which constituted fair comment on a matter of public interest. We took great care to verify the various bits of information which had long been reaching us. The case took 15 years to be decided by the court.

In May 2012, Judge Philip Sciberras, presiding over the First Hall of the Civil Court, found me guilty and ordered me to pay €1,700 to Pullicino. He said he did not believe the testimony of a particular prison security officer because his father was an editor of a newspaper published by the Nationalist Party.

We duly appealed and the Court of Appeal – Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri, Mr Justice Tonio Mallia and Mr Justice Joseph Azzopardi – overturned the verdict.

The Appeal Court’s judgment should long be remembered for a very bold statement it enunciates which, to my mind, goes a long way to uphold, encourage and protect the much cherished – but much abused – freedom of the press in our country. Investigative journalism should always be protected, said the court. And, significantly, it added, “even if there are mistakes in reporting”.

I had been in active journalism for more than 40 years, 33 of which as editor of a daily paper (11 years) and of a weekly (22 years). During all these years I had to face innumerable court cases but I had never heard such a clear and forceful appreciation of local investigative journalism by the courts.

Indeed, I can only describe my whole experience at the courts as rather going in the opposite direction. A few years ago I published a thorough and detailed investigation about what we discovered as abuses being perpetrated by a person in the public eye. We presented substantial circumstantial evidence but the court, acting in a spirit which is absolutely the reverse of this important declaration by the Court of Appeal, found us guilty and ordered that I, as editor, and the journalist who wrote the news items, pay thousands of euros in damages. I was, and still am, morally convinced that our reports reflected a true picture of events.

Investigative journalism should always be protected ‘even if there are mistakes in reporting’

I appeal to all journalists, particularly those at editorial levels, to study the latest case and refer to it when needed. A compare and contrast exercise between the earlier sentence and that of the Court of Appeal would be also helpful to journalists facing court cases such as the one being discussed here.

A similar appeal goes to members of the legal profession who are sometimes frustrated by certain decisions and sentences when defending editors and journalists.

I also humbly suggest that the outcome be brought to the attention of all members of the judiciary so that we will eventually have, so far as possible, a sentencing policy that reflects the same unequivocal intent.

I would like to express my appreciation for the hard work done in the last 17 years over this case by my legal consultant, Joe Zammit Maempel. He produced witnesses who proved to be a solid basis for our defence and who would not take the implications of the first sentence lying down.

He has legally assisted me and fellow colleagues for 25 years. I consider this sentence to be a fitting tribute to his professionalism, consistency and never-say-die spirit.

The court gave a lifeline to local investigative journalism. It is now up to us to cling to it with determination. The local journalist community’s duty now is not to let this milestone sentence be in vain.

Victor Camilleri is a former editor of In-Nazzjon Tagħna and Il-Mument.

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.