A police inspector has been awarded €2,000 in libel damages by a court which upheld his claim that an article published in the MaltaToday midweek paper had been based on unfounded information supplied by his former wife.

Elton Taliana had filed the libel suit some five years ago in a reaction to a front page article in August 2013, titled ‘Inspector in wrongful prosecution was investigated over 2007 arson.’

The unidentified writer of the article claimed that Inspector Taliana was at the heart of “internal scrutiny by the police force” over allegations that he could possibly have contacted Daryl Luke Borg before the latter was called to testify in a police inquiry concerning his mistaken arraignment over his suspected involvement in a Birkirkara holdup.

The article had claimed that Inspector Taliana had mistakenly prosecuted Mr Borg “together with three other police inspectors” and had further linked Mr Taliana with the arson attack on MaltaToday editor Saviour Balzan’s home in 2007.

Furthermore, the article alleged that Inspector Taliana had, on previous occasions, been investigated “over his alleged association with criminals.”

In the course of the libel proceedings, legal procurator Peter Paul Zammit, who was Police Commissioner at the time of the allegedly defamatory publication, had testified that two other police inspectors had been responsible for the mistaken arraignment of Mr Borg, pointing out that the true culprit, Roderick Grech, had been arraigned by Inspector Taliana.

After Mr Grech’s admission, Mr Borg had been released from custody and an internal police inquiry was appointed to investigate the matter.

As for the other allegations made by the anonymous writer, the court observed that the latter had evidently possessed confidential information leaked from police files.

In fact, Inspector Taliana had taken his grievance before the Data Protection Commissioner who, in June 2015, had fined the Police Commissioner €500 over the breach of data protection laws.

The court noted that the police had refused to produce Inspector Taliana’s personal file under the pretext that ongoing investigations could be “irreparably prejudiced.”

However, the applicant himself had exhibited this file in court so as to clear his name.

A close look at this file proved that all the internal ‘investigations’ referred to by MaltaToday had been no more than reports filed by Inspector Taliana’s ex-wife at a time when the ‘informer’ and the applicant had been going through annulment proceedings.

Indeed, the court observed that no steps were ever taken against Inspector Taliana. It had evidently been the same woman who had told the police that her former husband had been involved in the throwing of paint and arson attack on Mr Balzan’s home.

However, Mr Balzan had been informed by the police that Inspector Taliana was in no way involved in the attacks.

In the light of all evidence, Magistrate Francesco Depasquale concluded that the article had been based on mere allegations rather than “substantially true” facts and had been intended solely to tarnish the reputation of the Inspector by attributing to him offences which, as a police officer, he was duty bound to prevent.

The court declared the article defamatory and ordered former editor Raphael Vassallo to pay €2,000 in damages.