The Constitutional Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the Attorney General and confirmed a judgment of a previous court which had awarded Samuel Onyeabor €5,000 in damages for the violation of his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time.

The court heard that Mr Onyeabor was arraigned before the Magistrates Court in 2008 and charged with drug trafficking offences. By the time he filed his constitutional application in 2014, the compilation proceedings against him had not yet been concluded.

Mr Onyeabor had also complained of the fact that he had not been granted release on bail for almost two years and that he had been denied the possibility of travelling abroad to undergo a medical intervention.

Last January the First Hall of the Civil Court had found in favour of Mr Onyeabor and had ruled that the length of time it was taking for the compilation proceedings to be concluded was in violation of his right to a fair trial within a reasonable time.

In its judgment the first court had found that the Attorney General's office was understaffed and that this had led to the delays in Mr Onyeabor's case. But it was the responsibility of the State to address these shortcomings.

The first court however did not find any violation of Mr Onyeabor's rights resulting from the fact that he was not allowed to travel. Mr Onyeabor had been given the opportunity to undergo surgery in Malta but had refused. The First Hall of the Civil Court had concluded that Mr Onyeabor's right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time had been violated and awarded him EUR5,000 in damages.

The Attorney General appealed from this judgment to the Constitutional Court composed of Judges Giannino Caruana Demajo, Noel Cuschieri and Joseph Zammit McKeon.

On appeal the court heard the Attorney General's submission that each case had to be assessed on its particular merits, including those of the nature and complexity of the case and the behaviour of the parties to the suit.

In this case Mr Onyeabor had been charged with involvement in the importation and trafficking of almost six kilos of cocaine with a value of almost €600,000, making one of the largest drug hauls ever. According to the Attorney General, the investigation had been particularly complex and this had led to delays in the criminal proceedings under examination.

The Constitutional Court agreed that the case was complex but added that this did not mean that over six years were required to complete criminal proceedings and issue a bill of indictment against the accused. It resulted that the delays were not due to the complexity of the case but due to failures in the local system which allowed for witnesses to be heard periodically and for sittings to be put off as the court or the prosecution had more urgent cases to deal with.

The State was bound, said the Constituitonal Court, to ensure that the courts had sufficient resources to hear and decide cases with speed and efficiency. The court added that those people who actually worked within the courts also suffered from inertia.

The Constituitonal Court concluded by confirming the first court's judgment