The editor of Il-Mument was today condemned to pay €5,000 to Labour MP Franco Mercieca after libel proceedings instituted by the former parliamentary secretary.

Mr Mercieca sued over the publication of an article on  December 15, 2013, entitled 'Franco Mercieca jisfida u jibqa' ghaddej bil-prattika privata ' wherein it was alleged that he  had continued in his private practice after being promoted to parliamentary secretary.

Included in the article was a photo of a business sign outside a pharmacy in Victoria Gozo where tMr Mercieca allegedly offered his services as eye specialist together with other medical professionals.

The court, presided by Magistrate Francesco Depasquale, heard the testimony of Joseph Grech, owner of Joseph Dispensing Opticians, the pharmacy where Mr Mercieca had been meeting patients since 2004. Mr Grech confirmed that he had put up the signage which, among others, referred to Mr Mercieca. The court was also informed that the specialist ophthalmologist had attended regularly to his patients at the pharmacy and had continued to do so up to a forthright preceding the 2013 general election. However, after the election these visits ceased altogether.

The owner of the pharmacy also stated that he had not thought of removing Mr Mercieca's name from the signage and had only done so after news of the lawsuit reached him.

After the general election of 2013, all patients calling the clinic for an appointment were informed that Mr Mercieca was no longer a visiting professional.

The court observed that the defendant had failed to produce a copy of the queries which he claimed to have sent to Mr Mercieca. It appeared that the editor had failed in his duty to verify the facts of a story before consenting to its publication. The veracity or otherwise of the facts at issue could easily have been confirmed had the defendant spoken to the owner of the pharmacy.

The court remarked that when a person is promoted to a public position such as that of parliamentary secretary, the last thing on his mind would be to alter any professional plaque outside his office or elsewhere.

The court concluded that Mr Mercieca was not responsible for the necessary alteration of the signage outside the pharmacy. Since the editor had failed to verify the facts, the writing was judged to be defamatory. The editor was condemned to pay €5,000 by way of damages to Mr Mercieca.