A court ruled today that a letter by former Chief Justice and Ombudsman Joseph Said Pullicino to the President and the press was not defamatory.
Libel proceedings had been instituted by retired Judge Carmelo Farrugia Sacco, former president of the Malta Olympic Committee.
Prof Said Pullicino had, in December 2012, urged President George Abela to intervene so as to relieve Judge Farrugia Sacco of his official duties pending investigations into his alleged involvement in the Olympic Games ticket sales scandal.
In its decision today, the court said that a member of the judiciary owes a duty towards the Constitution, the institution of the courts and his fellow judges, in ensuring that whatever he does beyond his duties does not diminish or tarnish the trust which ordinary citizens should place in the courts.
Judge Farrugia Sacco had taken offence to the use of the term 'corruption' in his regard in Prof Said Pullicino's letter, saying there was malicious intent to defame him.
Magistrate Francesco Depasquale observed that the original article in the London Sunday Times which sparked off the local reportage of the scandal, had spoken of " widespread corruption among officials."
Moreover, the court noted that in comments to the Times of Malta, the plaintiff himself had referred to "all the corruption allegations " made by the British paper.
Had Judge Farrugia Sacco not occupied the role of president of the Maltese Olympic Committee he would not have been implicated in the case.
Basing itself upon the evidence produced, the court upheld the argument by Prof Said Pullicino that the letter amounted to a fair comment, concluding that the former Ombudsman had no intention to harm the former judge but was only expressing "his serious concern as a citizen and a retired Chief Justice."
Moreover, the court remarked that had Dr Farrugia Sacco abided by ethical principles and had not occupied the role of president of the Maltese Olympic Committee he would not have been implicated in the case, which generated so much reportage both locally as well as in foreign media.
The court thus concluded that the letter in question was not defamatory in respect of the plaintiff.
Lawyer Stephen Tonna Lowell was defence counsel to the defendant.