Former Sliema mayor Nicholas Dimech was cleared of bribery and threats against a public officer, after the court said it was not morally convinced of his guilt on the basis of the evidence produced.

The Court of Appeal had ordered the case to be heard anew after a Magistrates’ Court had handed down a one-year jail term to the former mayor.

The case revolved around allegations made by the Sliema council’s former contracts manager Stephen Buhagiar who claimed that the former mayor had demanded a bribe in return for a contract of services clinched with the council.

The contract was assigned for a trial period of six months in September 2009 on condition that it could be terminated if the councilors were not pleased with the services offered by Mr Buhagiar.

This being the case, the council had terminated the contract by a vote of eight to one in March 2010, prompting Mr Buhagiar to file a police report claiming that he had been deprived of his job because he had not handed over the bribe to the then-mayor.

Delving into the evidence put forward, presiding magistrate Joseph Mifsud pointed out that when assigned the case, both parties had done away with the re-hearing of witnesses. It was only the accused who had testified before magistrate Mifsud, giving a detailed graphic account of the psychological violence allegedly suffered during his interrogation.

The court gave particular weight to the fact that Mr Buhagiar had only reported the matter to the police once his contract had been terminated, telling other councilors that he wanted to “get back at [Dimech]”.

The accused’s own statement to the police, released without the assistance of a lawyer, was to be discarded on the strength of consistent caselaw on this matter, the court observed.

On the basis of all other evidence put forward, the court observed that the former mayor had done what he had been duty bound to do in assigning the tender to the most favorable bidder who had presented the most economically viable option to the council.

The matter would have been different had the contract been awarded to a person not deserving it, simply on account of some underhand bribe, the court observed.

Once Mr Buhagiar’s services were deemed unsatisfactory, the council had terminated the agreement and handed the contract to the second-best bidder.

Lawyers Mark Vassallo and Edward Gatt appeared for Dimech.