The Magistrates Court had been correct when it ordered the prosecution to exhibit a ministerial order for telephone tapping, the Court of Appeal ruled following an appeal by the Attorney General.

The case goes back to 2008 when the Magistrates Court was hearing criminal proceedings against Marco Pace.

The prosecution had exhibited a compact disc containing a recording of a telephone conversation made by Mr Pace and a third party. The recording had been allegedly made on the basis of a warrant issued by the minister responsible for the Security Service.

The Magistrates Court had ordered the prosecution to produce the warrant that had been issued by the Minister and the Attorney General appealed from this ruling to the First Hall of the Civil Court.

The first court had dismissed the Attorney General's request and the latter then appealed to the Court of Appeal.

In its judgement the appeals court said that it was a fundamental principle of law that every person was entitled to a fair hearing.

The provisions of administrative law were subject to this principle, and every action on the part of a public authority was subject to the review of the courts.

Even if the law gave the administration discretionary powers, the administration was not immune from judicial review.

In this case the court had to be satisfied that the telephone tapping was legal. This could only be achieved if the warrant ordering the tapping was exhibited before the courts.

The Court of Appeal, presided over by acting chief justice Albert J Magri, Mr Justice Geoffrey Valenzia and Mr Justice Tonio Mallia dismissed the Attorney General's appeal.