The opposition agreed in principle with the Various Laws (Criminal Matters) Bill and would vote for it in second reading, José Herrera told Parliament on Wednesday. However, it had certain reservation which would be expressed in committee stage.
The objects of the Bill are varied. It amends the Criminal Code with regards to proceedings instituted on the complaint of the injured party, where the complainant is the Head of a Government Department and to introduce a new contravention to public order.
It introduces amendments in the Code of Police Laws with regards to the prevention of annoyance to neighbours by barking dogs and to introduce a new section regarding the classification of audio-visual material for private home viewing.
It updates the provisions in the Traffic Regulation Ordinance regarding the breathalyzer tests and amends the Motor Vehicle Insurance (Third Party Risks) Ordinance specifically to introduce a new sub-article relating to the depositions taken on oath of an authorised insurer and their admissibility as evidence.
It also amends the Arms Act in relation to the disqualification of licences following an offence and the selling of toys in the shape of arms.
In many cases, penalties - either in form of fines or incarceration - are increased.
Dr Herrera welcomed the decision to add the provisions in the Criminal Code instead of creating independent legislations.
Many people said that the Attorney General was the highest member of the civil service. Meanwhile, there were those who argued that the Attorney General should be a Chief Magistrate.
In Malta, the Attorney General was not a political figure; he had the role of chief prosecutor and was responsible for advising the government.
Dr Herrera stressed that one should not strengthen the prosecution by eliminating fundamental principles of defence. The principle of equality of arms should reign.
While penalties for traffic offences have increased, cases were heard before the Commissioner for Justice. These tribunals were spread around Malta and people were kept without legal representation. One must now reassure good defence.
He expressed reservations with regards the order for the temporary freezing of assets and said this should be revised. There were now a substantial number of crimes leading to a freezing order. Currently it is the Criminal Court that could decide whether the magistrate could call for a freezing order or not.
Dr Herrera said it seemed that the government was not trusting the magisterial system. The Criminal Court that was exercising as the Court of Appeal.
In the past, magistrates had jurisdiction over cases where the accused could be sentenced to six months' imprisonment. Nowadays, they could take cognizance of cases where the accused could be sent up to 10 years' imprisonment. He expressed concern as to why the magisterial jurisdiction had so many little things that could appealed from. Was it only the Criminal Court that was trusted?
A freezing order should be publicly registered. An automatic mechanism was needed so that an order is removed once things return to normal.
Intervening, Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici, this will be seen to at committee stage.
Continuing, Dr Herrera referred to Clause 8, which speaks about crimes related to paedophilia, as one of the most important. The Opposition fully agreed that penalties should be increased and the introduction of a criminal registry for persons who committed crimes against minors. He called for further information about the criminal registry and questioned how this registry would be used. Would it be made public and given to schools?
Interjecting, Justice Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici said this registry would be available to those who required access.
Continuing, Dr Herrera said that cases of paedophiliac nature were appearing in front of the same magistrate. He declared that the constitution defined our courts as the Constitutional, the Civil and the Criminal Court.
He did not agree with the way magistrates were being appointed and suggested there be a leading magistrate collegially.
He welcomed the increase in punishment with regard to child pornography since one could not accept this situation.
Dr Herrera said a new law was being introduced through Clause 11 of the Bill, which dealt with adults communicating with minors. Certain people abused the advantages of the Internet and now, if one meets with a minor through deceitful chatting, it would also be considered as a crime.
In involuntary homicide, the punishment should be increased. However, one should be careful not to exaggerate.
On human trafficking, the definition was expanded to include slavery among others. The punishment could amount to nine years' imprisonment. Meanwhile, if a person imposed forced labour on children, he would also be severely punished.
While drink driving should be harshly punished, one should not make use of several roadblocks.
Parliament now stands adjourned for the Easter holidays and will meet again on April 19.