The Constitutional Court has confirmed a decision taken in April last year for the reinstatement of three police officers who were dismissed in 2001.

The decision had been appealed by the Prime Minister and the Police Commissioner.

Ivan Portelli, Michael Buttigieg and David Gatt had filed judicial applications against former Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami and former Police Commissioner George Grech. In three separate judgements, Mr Justice Joseph Azzopardi found Dr Fenech Adami and Mr Grech to be liable towards the three men in damages.

Former Inspector Ivan Portelli explained that he had made an appointment with a police informer on his yacht. The day before, Mr Portelli had been instructed to search the house of a certain Jack Farrugia when he had seized some documents.

When he boarded the informer's yacht, Mr Portelli was surprised to find other people, including Judge Godwin Muscat Azzopardi, Mr Justice Lino Agius and Mr Farrugia.

The day after, Mr Grech accused Mr Portelli of being in the company of an individual; (the informer) and in May 2001 he was dismissed.

However, Mr Portelli said he had not been informed of any charges against him.

Former Inspector David Gatt told the court he had been dismissed without knowing the charges against him, adding that the Police Commissioner had accused him of being in contact with criminals.

Similarly, former Sergeant Michael Buttigieg said the Police Commissioner had accused him of complicity in a criminal offence. Mr Buttigieg denied these accusations.

Former Commissioner Grech told the court that during the investigation of a hold-up he was informed by the Security Service that a phone call was traced between Mr Buttigieg and a suspect.

In his judgments, Mr Justice Azzopardi said that administrative decisions, which lead to the dismissal of the three former police officers, could be attacked if the principles of natural justice were not observed.

Mr Grech had recommended the Public Service Commission to dismiss the men.

However, the court said, the PSC had not informed the three men of the procedures against them or given them the opportunity to defend themselves.

One of the fundamental human rights was the right to have a fair trial and to be given the opportunity to present a defence. This principle had not been observed in the case of the three men, the court said.

As a result, their dismissal was declared null and void.