A request for the extradition of a Maltese-Australian man to Lithuania must be rejected as otherwise the courts could be an accomplice in human rights breaches due to the appalling conditions in Lithuanian prisons, a judge heard this morning.
The call for the request to be rejected was made by defence counsel appearing for 44-year-old company director Angelo Spiteri who is wanted in Lithuania over allegations of forgery and swindling.
Mr Spiteri is a director of the Vilnius-registered travel company Atostogu Sandelis. Iif found guilty he could spend a total of 17 years in prison.
On January 15, a Magistrates Court had acceded to a European Arrest Warrant issued last summer, but the man filed an appeal which started being heard this morning before Madame Justice Edwina Grima.
In his submissions, lawyer Jason Azzopardi who forms part of a the three-man defence team, noted how the arrest warrant was issued in line with the provisions of an EU framework decision. The latter stated that no persons shall be extradited to a state where there is a “serious risk” of inhuman treatment and torture, he pointed out.
The defence argued that it had presented sufficient evidence to back its claim that detention conditions in Lithuania could breach fundamental rights.
Dr Azzopardi referred to a January 2013 Irish Supreme Court ruling which blocked an extradition request, and three Council of Europe reports between 2001 and 2014, describing the appalling conditions.
He also backed his claim by a recent European Court of Human Rights Ruling handed down last month which confirmed that conditions had not improved.
Quoting from a Council of Europe report dated June 2014, the defence highlighted “the very serious scourge of overcrowding, the length of time prisoners spend in their cubicles (not cells, almost 23 hours per day), very poor detention and deplorable hygienic conditions and insufficient health care resources”.
“We are no longer talking about risk here, but on abuses which are actually still going on,” he told the court.
“Our court cannot ignore the EU Treaty which is based on the respect for human rights, and so it cannot be an accomplice in such breaches,” Dr Azzopardi added.
Tthe defence argued that even if the Appeals Court was notl convinced by its arguments it should, as a minimum seek the advice of the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
“It beggars belief how the Magistrates Court brushed away such a request,” Dr Azzopardi said. He pointed out how last month, two such requests were made by a German court.
While acknowledging that the decision to seek preliminary judgment was at the discretion of the first court, he argued that, at appeal stage, this was mandatory in line with the Treaty of the Functioning of the EU.
The defence also questioned why Malta was the least country which had filed such requests among all EU member states, with only two such cases. Even Cyprus has had more requests with five, Dr Azzopardi argued.
On the other hand, Vincienne Vella from the Attorney General’s Office, argued that the complainant had every right to seek redress before the Constitutional Court. The prosecution also noted how the first court was not obliged to seek a preliminary judgment from the ECJ.
The defence this morning filed a requesting bail noting how the prosecution had not raised any objections during the initial hearing but then changed its mind. The Appeals Court however, rejected this request and so the man is to remain in custody pending the outcome of the appeal.
Mr Spiteri, together with two other directors – Nerijus Ereminas and Guy Jane – is accused of authorising company employees to accept money in return for accommodation services, which in reality were never offered. The alleged fraud was committed between 2010 and 2011.
Lawyers Jason Azzopardi, Kris Busietta and Patrick Valentino were defence counsel whereas lawyer Vincienne Vella from the Attorney General’s Office and Police Inspector Mario Cuschieri prosecuted.
The case was put off for judgment on February 17.