A man facing the prospect of five years behind bars while struggling with his renal failure and battling his drug problem today took his request for bail to the superior courts.

Christopher Bartolo, 36, from Fontana is seeking release from custody pending the outcome of his appeal against his prison sentence. He stood in the courtroom today accompanied by relatives as the urgent proceedings concerning his request for bail got underway.

In April, the kidney transplant patient was sentenced to a jail term of five years and a €15,000 fine after he admitted to trafficking 1.5kg of cannabis.

Read: Kidney patient taken into custody 'after five hours of dialysis’

Also present for the hearing was the kidney donor, who turned up in court without being summoned, a gesture of goodwill which did not pass unnoticed by the court.

Throughout the sitting, the court, presided over by Mr Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri and Mr Justices David Scicluna and Joseph Zammit McKeon, was presented with an overview of the appellant’s medical condition and the manner in which his treatment was being handled by prison authorities.

Mr Saviour Lia, a correctional manager at Corradino, presented a certificate issued by the prison medical officer regarding the condition of inmate.

Taking the witness stand, Mr Lia explained how Mr Bartolo had entered the Corradino Correctional Facility on April 27, following the delivery of judgment by the criminal court.

In line with court recommendations laid down in the judgment delivered by Madame Justice Edwina Grima, prison authorities had sought to address both medical and psychological issues facing the accused, bearing in mind his need to undergo drug rehabilitation.

Prison officials even accompanied Mr Bartolo to the Mater Dei renal unit three times a week for dialysis treatment. During one such visit in June, medics noted a deterioration in his renal condition and recommended that the patient stay in hospital. In fact, the man was admitted on June 19 and was discharged on July 4.

Mr Lia confirmed that the appellant required treatment so as to maintain a stable medical condition. Asked directly by the court whether there had been any review of the patient’s medication upon discharge, the prison officer was unable to supply information regarding prior medication.

The court also questioned whether any change had been observed in the appellant’s condition since his discharge from hospital. The man had been admitted to hospital and kept there for one day for other reasons unrelated to his renal condition.

It also transpired that, shortly after being sent to jail, on May 8, Mr Bartolo had forwarded a request to undergo rehabilitation, which request was speedily processed by the relative board. However, the inmate had allegedly shied away from the proposition of registering for a Caritas programme upon learning that family visits would be very restricted.

Upon being asked by defence counsel Franco Debono to confirm whether his client had been denied admission to rehabilitation since the facilities could not cater for his special medical needs, Mr Lia replied that this issue had not yet been considered since Mr Bartolo had refused to go because of the lack of family visits.

“If you truly want to overcome your drug problem you must be prepared to face sacrifices, otherwise you will never break free,” remarked the Chief Justice, addressing directly the appellant. “The Court knows that persons in such a situation are usually ‘inspired’ to change and seriously consider rehabilitation only when faced with the prospect of jail. Unless you undergo such sacrifices the court will not be convinced that you truly want to change,” continued the judge.

The court was informed that not only was the appellant regularly accompanied to hospital for his kidney treatment, but prison authorities also followed any directions handed down by doctors for the patient’s well-being.

These included instructions regarding the special diet which he needed to follow, as outlined in a nutrition information booklet presented in court. Certain food items were to be avoided because of the man's medical condition.

The defence, however, was quick to point out that prison authorities had failed to act immediately upon such recommendations regarding nutrition and had done so only recently.

Mr Justice Zammit McKeon asked directly whether the prison in-house bakery could cater for wholemeal bread which appeared to be one of the food requirements indicated in the nutrition booklet. Mr Lia informed the court that he would make the necessary checks with the prison authorities.

The court also heard how on two particular occasions, certain dosages of prescribed medication had been administered late since there had been some delay in acquiring the medical products from the government pharmacy.

The case was adjourned to next Friday for the production of medical specialists who are to be summoned to testify about the appellant’s condition. The court declared that a decree on the issue was to be expected by the end of next week.

Lawyers Franco Debono and Amadeus Cachia were defence counsel. Lawyer Giannella Busuttil appeared on behalf of the AG’s office.