The recording of police interrogations is not a priority for the government, which is focusing on other issues, such as the duration of court cases, Justice Minister Carm Mifsud Bonnici said.
His comments come in the wake of a chorus of calls from criminal lawyers for police interrogations to be recorded in the interests of both the suspects and the officers.
Although he did not say whether he agreed with the suggestion, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said this was not a priority for the government “right now”.
When the argument was put to him that the present situation could expose the police force to all sorts of allegations by suspects, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said: “Allegations of police wrongdoing are always allegations. I am confident we have a good team of magistrates who can weigh these allegations and decide accordingly.”
The most recent such claims came from former Sliema mayor Nikki Dimech who said he was forced to sign a statement under psychological “duress”. He claimed the police withheld medication he needed for chronic panic attacks and asthma, which he suffers from.
Police Inspector Angelo Gafà vehemently denied the claims but admitted under cross-examination during Mr Dimech’s court case he did not record any of the interrogations in which the former mayor released conflicting statements.
The police only recorded interrogations that involved very serious crimes, he told court. Mr Dimech is charged with corruption.
Amendments to the Criminal Code in 2009 introduced the right for suspects to consult their lawyer for up to one hour before being questioned by the police.
Here, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said he was amenable to taking stock of how this right was working in practice but insisted there was more important work to be focussed on than the recording of interrogations. “We should look at this amendment and see how it is working and where it needs to be fine-tuned,” he said.
His ministry’s two main priorities in the coming year should be a shorter and speedier legal process and a stronger legal position for victims of crime, he insisted.
Improvements in both these targeted areas would be welcome but the call made by a swathe of criminal lawyers over the past weeks has been supported by MPs from both sides of the House who have joined the list of those who feel recording police interrogations is a fundamental matter.
“I most certainly agree that police interrogations should be recorded. I feel such an amendment would ensure better administration of justice,” Labour MP Josè Herrera said.
He said that throughout his 24 years’ experience as a criminal lawyer, he had several clients who would say the statement drawn up by the police did not reflect what they had said or meant to say. Others would say they would have been unduly pressured into making a statement.
He criticised the government for having pushed forward legislation favouring police prosecutions by overriding traditional lines of defence.
“When one speaks of having a strong prosecuting office and a strong investigating police force, one should not mean that we should arrive at this end by weakening the possibilities of a sound legal defence. At times, I feel that the scales of justice are starting to favour the prosecution too much,” he said.
The police already have some facilities for recording interrogations but not enough. PN backbencher Franco Debono said the police had six set-ups for audio recording but no equipment for the video recording of interrogations.
He stressed that the recording of interrogations should complement the safeguards afforded by the recently-introduced right of legal advice. Suspects are allowed to speak to a lawyer before an interrogation. Dr Debono insisted such assistance should be during the actual interrogation.
“One can contemplate mandatory recording. However, even in the absence of mandatory requirements, courts should apply the best evidence rule in cases where a confession is being contested and give weight to the fact that the police failed to present the best evidence available. In this manner, investigating officers would be aware that lack of recording could seriously jeopardise their case,” he said.
Dr Debono said he had already spoken in Parliament about the need to reconsider the whole investigative set-up, including appointing magistrates with an exclusive investigative function, rather than having the same magistrate conducting inquiries and deciding cases.