Digital recordings may not be specifically mentioned in the law regulating court proceedings, which only refers to electromagnetic tapes, but this technicality should not stop a case from continuing, a magistrate ruled yesterday.

Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit said that although the law was not exhaustive and did not mention the digital option, the method of recording was merely a means to an end, the end being the transcript of a witness’ testimony that became part of the official court documents.

Digital and electromagnetic recordings led to this “end” and the magistrate said she therefore saw no reason why she should stop a case on such a technicality. The ruling was made in the case of Freddie Delia, 33, of Żabbar who is accused of theft.

Mr Delia’s lawyer, Franco Debono, had called on the court for guidance over the fact that the digital recording system used in the case was not covered by law.

The sitting yesterday started with the magistrate and Dr Debono engaged in a shouting match as the lawyer insisted on including in the court documents replies to reports made in the media. On Monday, the magistrate admonished Dr Debono for phoning the courtroom to speak to her during a sitting saying it was “unacceptable”. He insisted on giving his version by having it formally noted in writing but the magistrate did not allow him saying the courtroom was not the place from where to send message to the press.

Dr Debono insisted yesterday he had not asked to speak to the magistrate but wanted to speak to her registrar to alert her that he was sick and to request that the case be put off.

He also insisted that he had never told the court that the case could go on without him. He had said the case could go on without his client who had to undergo treatment. Although he made these points in open court the magistrate did not allow him to note them down in writing in the court documents.

Dr Debono, a Nationalist MP, had long been lobbying for the introduction of digital recording systems in court. He had raised the issue in several parliamentary questions and debates in Parliament. Earlier this year, the old electromagnetic recording devices in court started being replaced by digital recording equipment.

Dr Debono was later alerted, by technical court expert Martin Bajjada, that the law did not cover the new digital system that only mentioned the use of electromagnetic tapes. Soon after the lawyer raised the issue in a court case before Magistrate Myriam Hayman when it resulted that four witnesses who had testified in the case against his client had not been recorded because of some problem with the new digital system. Magistrate Hayman has not ruled on the issue yet.

The lawyer also made his argument before Magistrate Stafrace Zammit in the case of Mr Delia. He pointed out that the law needed to be amended to include digital recordings for the sake of correctness and to ensure that this could not be used in future to file for nullity of proceedings.

“I raised this issue because, as a court official... I felt it was my duty to draw attention to a situation that could, in future, lead to the nullity of proceedings,” he said insisting that he was not saying digital recordings were bad but that they had to be covered by law.

The magistrate yesterday heard IT administrator Clifton Barbara explain that the recording system in the courtroom was part electromagnetic and part digital.

Dr Debono requested the appointment of an independent expert but the magistrate felt it was not necessary. She ruled it was true that the law was not comprehensive but this should not lead to the disruption of the case against Mr Delia.