Three police officers who were reinstated in September after the court ruled they had been discharged unfairly have managed to stop the Police Commissioner from taking further disciplinary action against them through the Public Service Commission.

An appeals’ court had ruled that former police inspectors Ivan Portelli, Michael Buttigieg and David Gatt had been dismissed unfairly nine years earlier over claims that they were involved in criminal activity. The ruling hinges on the fact that they had not been told there were procedures against them and so could not defend themselves.

But the police and the government insisted on their decision, stressing there had been valid grounds for their dismissal. Last month, Police Commissioner John Rizzo asked the PSC to reconsider the case against them.

After being informed of the fresh proceedings and told they were expected to file their submissions, the officers applied for a warrant of prohibitory injunction arguing they had already faced such proceedings in 2001 and the courts had declared their dismissal unfair.

Mr Justice Joseph R. Micallef upheld their request ruling they had prima facie grounds to block the action.

They also pointed out they were not receiving a salary from the government and, therefore, could not undergo proceedings before the commission.

But the Administration was keen to avoid the possibility of them claiming a right to be reinstated. The police had produced recordings of tapped telephone conversations which, they said, proved an unhealthy familiarity between the former officers and criminals.

The court had thrown out the evidence because the police failed to produce a warrant they required by law before tapping any conversation.

Police Commissioner John Rizzo had said the phone calls were recorded when the police were investigating a €2.33 million heist on the Group 4 security company in 2000.

Tapping can only be performed by the Security Service after a warrant is issued by the Home Affairs Minister or the Prime Minister for an identifiable person or telephone number.

According to law, when asking for a warrant, the Security Service head has to give reasons for the application and a warrant can only be used for the intended purpose. The law also stipulates that the minister can amend the warrant if asked to do so by the head of the Security Service.