Access to legal aid is central to ensuring access to justice, especially for the poorest and most vulnerable in society. It is an essential aspect of a fair, humane and efficient criminal justice system based on the rule of law. Without access to legal aid, people are at risk of having their rights ignored or even violated.
The recent judgment by the European Court of Human Rights about a Maltese-American, Stephen Galli, therefore gives cause for concern.
Mr Galli claimed that his right not to be subjected to torture or inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment had been violated during his detention at Corradino Correctional Facility.
The European Court of Human Rights noted in its decision that Mr Galli was initially assisted in his case by a legal aid Malta lawyer but was later unrepresented. The Strasbourg-based Court noted that “various problems arose” when he was asked to appoint a lawyer and to returnthe relevant forms. The applicant said that both the prison authorities and his lawyer had made it difficult for him to obtain the necessary form of authority.
In late 2016, the Court contacted the legal aid lawyer in question and asked for submissions on the case to be made but no reply was forthcoming. The statutory period for the submission of observations expired and no extensions were requested.
In view of “the repeated failings of the applicant’s legal representative” appointed by the legal aid system in Malta, the president of the European Court hearing the case decided that the lawyer in question should no longer represent or assist Mr Galli, who was allowed to represent himself.
The Maltese government was asked to comment on whether “the acts or omissions” of the legal aid lawyer were attributable to the State and, if so, whether Malta had hindered the applicant from effectively exercising his right to seek redress. The Court appears to have had a response but no details were available in the judgment.
The human rights Court also drew attention to various similar problems that had been encountered in cases in which the applicants were also represented by Malta’s legal aid lawyers.
Finally, the Court decided that – notwithstanding its concerns about “the acts and omissions” of legal aid lawyers, both in Mr Galli’s case and others before it – in view of the applicant’s own lack of response there was no longer any interest in pursuing his application. The case was therefore struck off the Court’s list.
The nub of the issue is that, as the Court noted in its decision, the legal aid situation arising from this case “could result in a hindrance by [Malta] of the effective exercise of an applicant’s right” to claim a violation of the European Human Rights Convention.
It is clear, prima facie, that lawyers appointed under the legal aid system are very often, if not regularly, failing to fulfil their duty – for whatever reason – of ensuring that those who cannot afford to hire their own lawyer would still have access to justice and are assured of being adequately represented throughout.
Mr Galli’s case is reason enough why the Minister for Justice should institute a thorough inquiry into what is exactly happening in the legal aid system and hold those responsible for its running fully to account.
This is a Times of Malta print editorial