Justice Minister Owen Bonnici is today expected to appear before a magistrate’s court to face charges of negligent driving and causing involuntary serious injuries to another person following a traffic accident in Santa Venera.

Ever since the incident took place, Dr Bonnici has maintained that it was an “unfortunate accident, which could happen to anyone”. The police have a tendency to automatically issue charges, in several cases without establishing to a sufficient level whether such charges are likely to stand up in court or not.

In the wake of Dr Bonnici’s accident, parallels were drawn with a case in 2010 that had involved former parliamentary secretary Chris Said who faced perjury charges over a child custody case he acted in as a lawyer. At the time, Dr Said had resigned from his post the day the court charges were issued. He was reinstated following his acquittal.

Dr Bonnici has seen no need to resign from his post. He has argued there is a sharp difference between his involuntary act and an accusation of perjury.

However, it has given rise to a sticky situation: as Minister of Justice, he is responsible for nominating judges from the current crop of magistrates and he will be appearing before one of them.

In our democratic system, we have enjoyed a healthy separation between the judiciary, the executive and the legislative. No one is suggesting that the judiciary will not be impartial in this case involving a government minister. The judiciary has on many occasions shown its mettle even in politically-charged court cases, let alone in a case involving a traffic accident. And, in reality, whether the minister resigns in the interim period makes little difference unless the Prime Minister is prepared to change his portfolio.

Yet, there are lessons to be learnt in this case. Firstly, the Justice Minister should not have waited for the incident to be reported by the press. He should have issued a statement about it as soon as it took place. That could have avoided damaging speculation.

Secondly, Dr Bonnici should never have entered into the debate of whether he should go or not. In doing so, the minister led the Nationalist Party to jump into the fray, politicising the issue. It was up to the Prime Minister to explain why he opted to keep the Justice Minister in his post while there is a pending court case.

The incident simply highlights the delicate situation that exists where the separation between the judiciary and the executive enters a grey area. Such situations should be avoided at all cost and one way to avoid a repeat in the future is for the government to start implementing the reforms proposed last year by the Justice Reform Commission headed by former European Court of Human Rights judge Giovanni Bonello.

Included in those recommendations is that the Commission for the Administration of Justice should have a greater say in the appointment of judges and magistrates, diluting the minister’s sole discretion, as the situation stands now.

At the time, Dr Bonnici said the government would move ahead quickly on the proposals. He could certainly move faster and there is no doubt that what is being proposed is a desirable outcome.

If nothing else, the incident he has been caught up in highlights the delicate situation that exists where the separation between the judiciary and the executive enters a grey area. The government must be committed to eradicating any doubt in this sphere.

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.