The Nationalist Party has appealed a judgment delivered last month dismissing the party’s request to stop the Electoral Commission from investigating it over an alleged breach of party financing laws.
The case had been instituted by the PN in the wake of an investigation launched by the Electoral Commission into suspected irregularities in donations by the db Group to the party through its media company.
In a lengthy judgment the First Hall, Civil Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction, presided over by Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon, had held that the Electoral Commission was completely independent and impartial, rising above party politics. The court had also rejected the PN’s claim that the commission was biased against it as votes before the commission always ended in five votes in favour and four against, to the detriment of the PN.
The court also ruled that the Commission’s eventual decision on the party funding case could be subject to appeal before the civil courts, thereby guaranteeing the right to a fair hearing.
The first court had also declared that the sub-committee tasked with gathering information for the Commission did not signify a delegation of powers in breach of the constitution.
However, in the appeal application, the PN pointed out that the right of appeal could never erase the ‘sin’ of an administrative authority, as wrongly implied by the first court. Moreover, worst still, the Party would suffer “irreparable damage” whilst awaiting appeal proceedings to be decided upon before the civil courts.
The first court had totally ignored the fact that years could lapse before final judgment was delivered and meanwhile a political party would suffer years of “attacks and accusations” giving rise to a situation that was certainly neither just nor lawful.
Moreover, the first court had ignored the fact that the civil court reviewing a decision by the Electoral Commission would not hear witnesses who had already testified before the Commission’s sub-committee.
The first court had “completely ignored” the established safeguard that only a court, set up according to the Constitution, should handle accusations of a criminal nature and had also misinterpreted previous constitutional cases. Even if the Party Financing Act granted powers to the Electoral Commission to investigate, judge and impose sanctions against a political party, any delegation of such powers to third parties, except for the appointment of an auditor to assist it in its duties, was unconstitutional.
Pointing out that sanctions could include a maximum penalty of €50,000 and the suspension of party officials, such powers were in breach of the basic principles of natural justice and fundamental rights since the Commission was not an independent and impartial court.
The PN said it had never received any summons, charge or formal notice that indicated what it was being investigated for. In the light of such circumstances, it requested the court to declare that having the Electoral Commission as investigator, prosecutor and judge, as well as the process involving the meting out of penal sanctions by a body that was not a court, was in breach of the right to a fair hearing. Summoning party officials for information, thereby exposing the party to accusations and sanctions, was also to be declared in breach of rights.
Lawyer Jason Azzopardi signed the appeal application.