A controlled delivery of a drug package organised by the police to determine its recipient does not amount to entrapment and therefore does not breach human rights, a court has ruled.

Madam Justice Jacqueline Padovani Grima, presiding over the First Hall of the Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction turned down a human rights complaint made by two men accused of cannabis trafficking and conspiring to deal in drugs.

Henry Grogan, 31, and Luke Muscat, 26, filed their case claiming that the controlled delivery of the drug amounted to entrapment and therefore was in breach of their human rights.

They claimed that undercover agents from the Drug Squad had organised the delivery of the drug and incited the commission of the offence.

But Madam Justice Padovani Grima said that there was no evidence that could show that the two men had been instigated to commit the crime over which they were charged. She said evidence in court so far had revealed that the two men had been planning the drug trafficking since November 2009 and it was only in January 2010 that the police received information about the men’s alleged link to drug trafficking.

The court noted that it was Anthony Calleja, the prosecution’s main witness, who approached the police with information about the deal.

The controlled delivery of the drug began on February 9, 2010, when a sample was delivered and it was only the next day that Mr Grogan, following a phone call, went to collect the entire consignment of 19 blocks of cannabis.

Madam Justice Padovani Grima therefore ruled that the persons who provoked the crime were not the agents but the prosecution’s main witness. The involvement of the police came after the drug deal was planned and was not decisive for the crime to have taken place.

She therefore ruled that the controlled delivery of the cannabis consignment did not amount to entrapment and therefore no human rights were breached.

Mr Grogan and Mr Muscat are currently awaiting trial to be charged with conspiring to traffic five kilogrammes of cannabis, trafficking, and possession in circumstances which denoted that the drug was not for their personal use. They are denying the charges.

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.