Updated 8.35 p.m. - Adds Graffitti reaction

The Attorney General has reacted sharply to questions raised at a public protest on Saturday about the way how a trial by jury against a bouncer was conducted.

The bouncer was accused of having caused the death of  migrant, Suei Isail Abubaker, when he punched him and he fell to the ground, hitting his head. However the jurors unanimously acquitted him.

In a press conference held by the Migrants Network and the Graffitti Movement, questions were raised over how two French students who had witnessed the event and then left Malta were not summoned to give evidence.

The Attorney General said that contrary to what was implied, the police arrived quickly on the scene of the crime and investigations started immediately.

The two French students had given sworn evidence before a Magistrate during the compilation of evidence. They were also cross-examined by the defence. The law laid down that when witnesses were away, they did not need to be heard viva voce during atrial but the evidence given during the compilation proceedings would be read to the jury. This was the procedure which had always been followed, and it was followed in this case as well.

The Attorney General insisted that it was not true that almost all the witnesses in the trial had some connection to the accused. Most of the witnesses were police officers, expert witnesses and civilians, as was normal in any trial.

"It is therefore wrong and unfair to have statements which tarnish the judicial process and the prosecution with insinuations of racism and ulterior motives simply because those making such insinuations disagree with the final verdict of the jurors... In a democratic society, respect for court judgements is a basic element to guarantee rights for all," the Attorney General said.

GRAFFITTI REACTION

In a reaction, Graffitti Movement said the Attorney General had failed to  answer concerns raised with regards to the role of the prosecution in this case and why it 'did not take an active role' in court to prove the case.

"The AG did not answer one single question on why the prosecution did not highlight in court the many weak points present in many of the testimonies given. Furthermore, it certainly does not help to lessen the fear that immigrants and African people are experiencing daily in Malta, and it basically proves the whole point of the press conference – i.e. that there is such a thing as institutional racism in Malta and that we should fight against it," the lobby group said.

The group noted that in the case of Suleiman Abubaker, the victim was constantly referred to as “l-iswed” (“the black one”) by some people in court and  most of the witnesses present at court were obviously biased.

"We also insist that in an important case such as this one the French witnesses should have been brought to court to give their testimony, and not having their statement simply read out."

The group said that in a democratic society, there should be respect towards court decisions and the rights of all should be guaranteed. However, it asked whether the AG was implying that the court was above criticism and that it could operate in a discriminatory manner.