Peppi Azzopardi, producer of the popular TV programme Xarabank, is “taking legal advice” and considering his next steps after a magistrate on Friday ordered him to keep two interviews off air.

“This is a serious matter that should concern all journalists in Malta,” he told The Sunday Times of Malta when asked whether We Media, the company that produces the programme, intends to challenge the gagging order.

In an unusual move, Magistrate Joe Mifsud, who is presiding over the compilation of evidence in the case of Liam Debono – the 17-year-old accused of attempted murder for running over traffic policeman Simon Schembri – ordered Xarabank to refrain from broadcasting interviews with Mr Debono and Mr Schembri.

Read: Peppi Azzopardi outraged as Xarabank is forbidden from airing interview

The gagging order was issued after a legal application by Mr Schembri objecting to the planned Debono interview, a request that was backed by the Attorney General.

The magistrate’s decree invoked article 517 of the Criminal Code, which empowers a criminal court to prohibit publication of criminal proceedings of any particular case.

The article states that every court of criminal justice may prohibit the publication “of any writing, whether printed or not, in respect of the offence to which the proceedings refer, or of the party charged or accused”.

It is understood that last Friday’s decree barred solely the broadcasts on Xarabank, without impinging on other media outlets in publishing or broadcasting about the case.

Article 517 has reportedly only been invoked around 12 times in the past 40 years or so. 

Mr Azzopardi, producer of Xarabank, mentioned a litany of cases of injustices that the programme would not have been able to feature were this gag to be rolled out more widely.

 “We had the case of Chris Bartolo, a person without a kidney in prison. Had there been this decree, we wouldn’t have been able to talk about this case and Bartolo would still be in prison today,” he said.

This order is an insult to the judiciary and juries in Malta, because it’s saying that a TV programme can influence and change the course of justice

“Another example is the case of William Agius: sentencing in his case had been delayed for 19 years. We featured the case and the Prime Minister said that he was so worried about it that he was losing sleep on it. With this decree we wouldn’t have been able to report on that either.”

Then there was the case of Dorianne Camilleri, whose initial five-year imprisonment was truncated to a suspended sentence on appeal after a feature on Xarabank led to two new witnesses coming forward. 

Article 517 invocations were intended particularly in trials by jury, the reasoning being that members of the public on jury service are more likely to be influenced by media coverage than the judiciary. This was one of the chief reasons specified by Magistrate Mifsud in issuing the order.

Another reason is that Xarabank is the second most popular programme in Malta and hence uniquely able to influence a wide swathe of society, in what the magistrate described as a “trial by media”.

 “This order is an insult to the judiciary and juries in Malta, because it’s saying that a TV programme can influence and change the course of justice,” Mr Azzopardi said. “To say that a TV programme can influence a judge or a jury is to say that in Malta there is no proper justice system.”

He said that trial by media had been happening for five months against Debono. “Comments abound on social media hideously condemning him to brimstone and fire. For five months he has been depicted as a monster, and everyone seems to be fine with that. It was fine to hold a national protest after the incident, and nothing stirred last week when Schembri unveiled a plaque at the President’s palace on the Blue Foundation.

“Doesn’t all of that influence a jury by the same reasoning? Then all hell broke loose about an eight-minute interview with Debono.”

Mr Schembri's court application was not served on Mr Debono’s defence lawyers for their submission as is usually the case. 

The Attorney General said he did not believe the interview should be aired, and expressed disgust at the lack of ethical journalism about sub-judice proceedings.

A senior source in the justice system said the historical use of article 517 was in trial by juries in which there would be less than a year between arraignment and trial, and it was felt to be prudent to avert publication that could prejudice cases. He added that the situation today is different, partly because cases can drag on for years.

Mr Debono’s lawyer, Franco Debono, would not be drawn into whether the defence will mount a response to last Friday’s decree.

A hearing in the compilation of evidence over the incident is scheduled for Monday morning.