A constitutional application made by a prisoner who claimed to have suffered inhuman and degrading treatment at the prisons was dismissed by a judge this morning.

Mr Justice Mark Chetcuti delivered the judgment following an application filed by Paul Caruana against the Director of Prisons and the Attorney General.

Mr Caruana in 2003 was charged with the attempted murder of his wife, seriously injuring her, and illegal possession of a knife.

In July 2006, in a trial by jury, Mr Caruana was acquitted of the charge of attempted murder but was found guilty of the other charges and sentenced to three years imprisonment. This sentence was confirmed on appeal in May 2007.

Mr Caruana claimed that while he was serving his prison sentence he was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment by prison staff . He said he was deprived of proper medical care, made to take medicines he did not need and sent to a psychiatric hospital without need.

The prison authorities denied these allegations.

In the judgment the court declared that like every other prison, Mr Caruana was obliged to observe the prison rules and could not expect to have his requests acceded unless formal permission was given. Neither could Mr Caruana expect to have his verbal requests met without the observance of the necessary protocols.

Mr Caruana had directed most of his complaints against the prison psychiatrist and had claimed that this doctor had abused his office when he had treated him as a sick man and given him medicines unnecessarily.

However, the evidence produced showed that Mr Caruana had needed psychiatric care even before his trial by jury was concluded. The prison psychiatrist had concluded that Mr Caruana suffered from morbid jealousy about his wife and that he was developing paranoid traits. As the prison authorities could not enforce psychiatric treatment, Mr Caruana was taken to the Forensic Unit in Mount Carmel Hospital.

Another psychiatrist who examined Mr Caruana claimed that while the latter did not show signs of madness he had an alarming rate of rigidity and fixation in his love to his wife. Mr Caruana had in fact required medical treatment.

The court also dismissed Mr Caruana's claim that he had been prohibited from seeing his wife while she was recovering in hospital. In fact during the 18 day period in which Mrs Caruana was in hospital, Mr Caruana had been escorted to her on two occasions. This was not inhuman or degrading treatment, said the court.

When referring to Mr Caruana's claim that he had been denied the dental treatment he had required the court noted that he had been taken to see a private dentist and that he had also been seen by the prison dentist. The prison authorities had not ignored Mr Caruana's claims.

In conclusion the court dismissed Mr Caruana's allegations.