Justice Minister Owen Bonnici yesterday denied playing with people’s emotions when last week in Parliament he read out an e-mail from a man who had abused drugs several years ago and was now facing prison even though he had since reformed and started a family.
The accusation was made by Opposition home affairs spokesman Jason Azzopardi, who had said there was no doubt it was wrong for the case to have taken so long to be decided. But he could not understand why Dr Bonnici had opted to read out the convicted person’s e-mail unless he intended to pardon him.
If Dr Bonnici intended to recommend a pardon, what about similar cases? What was the cut-off point? Would it be the time it took for the case to be decided, the fact that the accused had since married or had children?
If the minister did not feel that this case merited a pardon, then why had he raised it in Parliament, creating confusion?
It was right that the minister was taking measures to speed up court proceedings, Dr Azzopardi said, but it was wrong of him to play with people’s emotions.
Winding up the debate in the second reading of the Bill to amend various criminal laws, Dr Bonnici rejected the accusation. He said he could very well have argued that the case had taken place several years ago and he had only been minister for a year, therefore it was not of his doing.
However, he felt he had to offer the man an apology and expedite proceedings so that such cases might become the exception and not the rule.
Dr Azzopardi also referred to an apparent case of miscarriage of justice, where a man was jailed after his conviction was upheld on appeal. The man was subsequently released on a temporary court order.
He said that with a minor amendment, Maltese law could provide the mechanism for a review by the Court of Appeal when a complaint of miscarriage of justice was made. This mechanism was currently only limited to trials by jury.
In the longer term, the country could consider the setting up of a Criminal Cases Review Commission as was done in the UK.