Centuries ago, Aristotle wrote that, at his best, man is the noblest of all animals but that, separated from law and justice, he is the worst.
The administration of justice, a most noble and rewarding mission and just as much a thankless vocation, concerns us all. With this in mind, I recently addressed Parliament, on behalf of the Opposition, on the Justice Ministry votes.
Being a member of the legal profession for nearly 20 years, I spoke rationally, but from the heart. I have seen, like many others, the huge expectations of clients, the anxiety worn by victims, the accused clothed in apprehension, the zeal and meticulous attention to duty imbued in members of the judiciary, people flustered at court delays and the evil of prejudice.
I yearn for the efforts to improve the administration of justice to yield the desired fruit. The Opposition will rejoice at any tangible evidence of progress in the justice sector. Progress in this most delicate of portfolios benefits all of society.
But, precisely because I have this sector so much at heart, beyond the government’s spin, the whole mosaic of facts needs to be known. Not because I respect less the Minister of Justice but because I love justice more.
It’s high time the minister implemented the 2012 agreement signed with the judiciary
Yes, it’s high time the minister implemented the 2012 agreement signed with the judiciary wherein the government agreed to increase the retirement age to 68 and to concretely address the pension anomaly that humiliates the judiciary. Retiring from the Bench and receiving €900 per month in 2015 hurts. The 2012 agreement goes a long way to make up for this.
What is the minister waiting for to implement, after three years, this agreement? After all, the Cafe Premier and Australia Hall deals were done and dusted in less than three months by this administration.
Statistics, like circumstantial evidence, do not lie but may deceive. We have been told, not with insignificant fanfare, that there was a 11 per cent reduction in the backlog of pending cases. I repeatedly asked the minister to publish a detailed breakdown of this and to show how he reached this conclusion. To date, no such information has been provided.
What has been provided is this: since 2012 the number of pending trials by jury stands at 83, the number of civil appeals waiting to start being heard is 301, while a staggering 1,038 cases have yet to appear before the Superior Court of Appeal, including litigation on family issues, property, inheritance and personal injury claims. A mind-boggling 535 appeals are waiting to start being heard before the Criminal Court of Appeal, including cases on non-payment of maintenance, domestic violence, theft and bodily harm.
We have been fed a myriad of public declarations and promises by the Minister for Justice that “judicial reform is imminent” (December 1, 2013), the “Judiciary Reform Bill was under scrutiny” (April 3, 2014), a “new law soon covering legal profession” (September 30, 2014), a “huge justice reform Bill due by the end of the month” (March 12, 2015) and that “we will reform the way judiciary is appointed” (May 18, 2015).
Needless to say, none of these commitments have been met months after their deadline. Talk is cheap, true, but not that cheap. An ounce of performance is worth pounds of promises.
This Ministry of Justice is beset by warped priorities. I revealed in Parliament that, as shown in the Financial Estimates for 2016, the vote for salaries and wages, including allowances and overtime, for the ministry’s staff will increase by an astonishing €800,000.
At the same time, the 2016 fund for Compensation for Victims of Crime will be a paltry €1,000. This insult is rendered more trenchant considering that last January, the minister, true to form, proclaimed that the newly enacted law on victims of crime was “the beginning of the road for victims. These rights will cost money. Every new right requires funds... and that there is no price tag for those rights”.
I decry the complete absence of consultation with the Opposition on the justice sector. In April last year, the minister said that “this is a government open to ideas”. In the last 12 months, I haven’t been summoned once, neither to be consulted nor informed.
This is the exact opposite of how ministers, before 2013, treated their counterparts before a parliamentary debate.
Our Constitution states that the Opposition is a major stakeholder in the administration of justice. The government thwarts it. Coming from a minister who last year said that he was “encouraged by the Opposition’s maturity and cooperation and that it augured well for future reforms”, this blatant disregard of the Opposition does not do justice to the Justice Minister’s platitudes.
The Opposition wants to contribute to a better administation of justice. With our bold proposal for the judiciary to start filing an annual declaration of assets and for due diligence in the judicial appointments, transparency will increase exponentially.
We have other ideas. Whether the government wants to hear us out is another matter.
jason.azzopardi@gov.mt
Jason Azzopardi is shadow minister for citizen rights, justice and democracy.