The former editor of In-Nazzjon was ordered by a court to pay to a former member of the Special Mobile Unit after an article carried by the newspaper on November 26, 2014 was judged to be defamatory.
Nathaniel Attard, as editor at the time of thepublication, was held responsible for the defamatory content of the article entitled 'Government calls back former SMU police officers'.
The court noted that the article had been accompanied by a photo of the notorious police squad in action as well as a sub-title in bold print stating that "This policeman was one of the harshest in respect of Nationalist supporters."
The court observed that the article made statements which were historically correct. There was no doubt that the SMU "had a tainted reputation after years of highly disreputable activities", a fact which was not denied even by the plaintiff.
There was no doubt that the SMU had a tainted reputation after years of highly disreputable activities", a fact which was not denied even by the plaintiff
It was also a proven fact that Mario Farrugia had formed part of the special unit at the time of commission of the political incidents in Rabat in 1987.
However, the plaintiff had testified that on the day of the violent episode he had been posted as driver of the police vehicle and had not been involved in the clashes between the SMU and a number of Nationalist Party supporters.
The court, presided by magistrate Francesco Depasquale, stated that the defendant had produced no evidence in support of the allegations made in the plaintiff's regard.
The court concluded that while freedom of the press and the important role of journalists deserve protection by the courts, "freedom of expression carries with it duties and responsibilities which also apply to the media".
It was observed that the right to freedom of expression "should not be used as a licence to tarnish the reputation of any individual" since this would erode the very basic values of our society.
The court declared the article in question to be defamatory and ordered the defendant to pay €3,000 by way of compensation to the plaintiff.
Lawyer Edward Gatt appeared for the plaintiff.