The case against a police constable charged with breaching the peace was declared time-barred. Photo: Jason Borg

The question of whether someone in the police covered up for a colleague may never be answered, after a court case was dismissed yesterday because it became time-barred.

The case, against a drug squad constable, was over swearing in public and breaching the peace, which he allegedly committed last October outside the Mosta home of his former partner, also a member of the police force.

The woman had also accused him of harassing her after they broke up in 2013, including one incident that occurred at the police headquarters.

However, the charges issued against him did not include harassment, prompting her lawyer Arthur Azzopardi in a court sitting on March 11 to ask whether someone in the police force was covering up for the accused.

Yesterday, as requested by the lawyer and ordered by the magistrate, Assistant Commiss­ioners Carmelo Magri and Martin Sammut were meant to explain why the harassment charge was omitted.

However, they never took the stand, after Magistrate Carol Peralta ruled that the case against the constable was time-barred, because he had been summoned to appear in court over three months after the Mosta incident.

In the March sitting, Dr Azzopardi said the harassment had started at the police headquarters. His client reported the matter to the police Internal Affairs Unit but despite the complaint, no investigation was carried out, he said.

In that sitting, the accused had not turned up and the magistrate ordered that he be brought to court under arrest yesterday.

The magistrate had also ordered that Mr Magri and Mr Sammut be summoned to appear before him to explain why the constable was only charged with breaching the peace.

During yesterday’s sitting the constable’s lawyer, Joseph Giglio, pointed out that his client had not been notified to appear for the March 11 sitting. He also said that the case was time-barred as the prosecution had failed to summon his client within three months of the incident.

The magistrate declared the case time-barred.

Names are not being published to protect the identity of the woman.