Prime Minister Joseph Muscat yesterday refused to take questions over Judge Lino Farrugia Sacco’s retirement before Parliament could decide on an impeachment motion.
Times of Malta specifically asked to speak to the Prime Minister on the judge’s case at the end of a public function at his office in Castille and an assistant said he would speak to Dr Muscat and get back to us.
However, as soon as the function was over, both the Prime Minister and his assistant rushed to their offices leaving waiting journalists without an answer.
Before the election, Dr Muscat had said he would follow whatever recommendation the Commission for the Administration of Justice made, even though judge’s son was a Labour Party election candidate.
After the election, the government opted to wait for Judge Farrugia Sacco to exhaust his legal remedies before a decision was taken in Parliament.
Black day for the principle of accountability
As the judge turned 65 yesterday – the legal retirement age for members of the judiciary – the Nationalist Party said it was a “black day” for the principle of accountability.
PN deputy leader Mario de Marco said that although the judge’s impeachment was “not a foregone conclusion” given the government’s nine-seat majority, Parliament should have gone ahead and discussed the motion despite pending court cases the judge had filed.
“It is a black day for the principle of accountability and those who hold respect for the judiciary at heart,” Dr de Marco said during a press conference with PN executive council president Karol Aquilina outside the law courts in Valletta.
He added: “Today is a victory for those who think they are above the law. It is a sad day for all those who believe in good governance and those who believe justice should be done with everyone, including members of the judiciary.”
The Commission for the Administration of Justice had twice concluded that the judge had breached the judiciary’s code of ethics and should be impeached.
An impeachment motion moved by former prime minister Lawrence Gonzi was declared extinguished by Speaker Anġlu Farrugia on the grounds that such a motion could not be carried from one legislature to another and, furthermore, Dr Gonzi had resigned from the House.
Dr Muscat then moved a fresh impeachment motion but the judge legally challenged the procedure followed.
After the commission recommended for the second time in two months that Parliament should debate the impeachment motion, the government, last February, opted to give the judge the opportunity to exercise his legal rights before Parliament proceeded with the impeachment motion.
This led the Opposition to accuse the government of employing delaying tactics, given Judge Farrugia Sacco’s imminent retirement.
Former European Court of Human Rights judge Giovanni Bonello had said that Parliament’s decision to wait “conspired to reinforce the conclusion that the judiciary became wholly untouchable once appointed”.
His opinion was echoed by Dr de Marco yesterday who said that what Judge Farrugia Sacco had been allowed to do “only serves to help undermine the people’s trust in the judiciary”.
When Times of Malta pointed out that Parliament could not have debated the impeachment motion once there was a claim of a breach of human rights, Dr de Marco said there were various court cases that continued despite such a claim.
Moreover, he noted, Parliament was supreme and the country’s highest institution could not be expected to wait because of pending court cases.
“If it is eventually proven that his human rights had been breached, there are remedies the court could offer. But this should not stop Parliament from discussing the matter,” he argued.
He said the government should practise what it preached in terms of the justice system.
Dr de Marco said Dr Muscat and Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, in particular, had failed the test to prove that even members of the judiciary should be held accountable.