Those in the political arena should fend off allegations through political debate, not in court, a magistrate said.
Magistrate Francesco Depasquale made the comments when deciding two libel suits, one by the leader of the Opposition and the other by a former Labour European Parliament election candidate.
He dismissed a case filed by Cyrus Engerer against the Nationalist Party over comments posted on its website during the last general election campaign.
Mr Engerer, the Prime Minister’s special envoy to the EU, had taken exception to being described as a “backstabber” in a 2012 opinion piece uploaded on the PN’s www.mychoice.pn website.
The post referred to an incident that occurred when Mr Engerer was serving as Sliema’s deputy mayor under the PN ticket. He had recorded a conversation between himself, the former Sliema mayor, Joanna Gonzi, and a third unnamed person. The conversation centred on allegations in relation to PN councillor Bobby Calì and PL councillor Martin Debono, who were arraigned over misappropriation and later acquitted. Mr Engerer was heard telling Ms Gonzi that “it would be easier to hit them with a large hammer”.
“This court makes it clear the while the law and the courts are there to protect each citizen from injustices and damages, those who choose to enter the political arena have to be ready to fight for their beliefs in the political arena and not in the judicial arena,” the magistrate said. He made a similar comment in the case of a libel suit from Simon Busuttil against l-Orizzont.
Dr Busuttil complained about a 2014 editorial entitled ‘Trading in Influence’, which alleged that his consultancy firm, Europa Research and Consultancy Services Ltd, had been fed contracts by direct order under the Nationalist administration.
The editorial referred to a number of companies that had resorted to the illegal practice of trading in influence and said that Dr Busuttil had the duty to put people’s minds at rest that neither him nor his companies were ever involved in such abusive practice.
“The plaintiff, instead of answering to the allegations made against him and making public clarifications, as was asked of him, resorted to legal action,” the court said, throwing out the case.