The Chamber of Advocates has expressed its disappointment at the prime minister’s statements on Sunday in which he said it was important that the Courts send a strong message to society with harsher sentences.
The Chamber said it was not the Court’s role to send a message to anyone but only to decide the merits of those cases pending before them, independently and impartially, by applying the law against everyone, without exception.
Following the murder of a Turkish woman in Gzira and the unprovoked attack on a group of four boys by a gang of youths in Valletta, Prime Minister Robert Abela called for harsher sentences by the courts to send a message to society.
While speaking in Birkirkara on Sunday, the prime minister added that he had chatted with a magistrate who told him that even when the lower courts imposed harsh sentences, they were inevitably reduced on appeal, citing previous judgments.
In a statement the following day, the Chamber said: “Anyone who makes generic statements about how the courts should have decided certain cases without a detailed analysis of the evidence and submissions made to the Court cannot but give a superficial evaluation.”
It is up to the politicians to legislate and the judges to then apply the laws, the Chamber added.
As for the conversation between the prime minister and a member of the judiciary on matters related to their functions, the Chamber reminded the prime minister that this was not allowed by the code of ethics of the Bench unless authorised by the Chief Justice. The Chamber stressed that this was a fundamental principle that must always be respected.
This same point was underscored by Repubblika, who said in a statement that it was shocked by the prime minister’s claim.
The Rule of Law NGO pointed out that the code of ethics for judges and magistrates states that they: “Shall not communicate in private with members of the Executive on any matter connected with their duties or functions except through or after express consultation with the Senior Magistrate and/or with the Chief Justice.”
The fact that the prime minister spoke of this abuse with such levity shows how little he cares for the basic principles of ethics in public life and the public institutions’ autonomy, the organisation said.
Independent candidate Arnold Cassola has asked the Standards Commissioner to investigate Abela’s abuse of power.
The PM and the worst possible environment he created in this country, full of bullies, opportunists and Gods who think that nothing will ever stop them before serious crimes, led his master to speak out about his sense of superiority without thinking too much about the seriouseness of the case. You know why? That is because Robert Abela can, as he is the omnipotent who does not distinguish between right and wrong, because whatever he does is divine and continues to be revenerated by the Gahans. God bless us all from this lunatic.
And the PM is a lawyer and former legal advisor to the disgraced Joseph Muscat who in any other jurisdiction would probably be behind bars.
Farcical!
Quite a few decades ago, someone said that he considers University Degrees as simply “bicca karta biex tgezwer l-incova fiha”.
Many of us still remember that disrespectful phrase – even though the one who said it had, he himself, acquired a local Architect’s Degree and an MA degree from Oxford University.
Nowadays it seems that the Code of Ethics governing the behaviour of our Judiciary deserves even lower respect than “karta ta’ l-incova”.
In this context. Back around 1981, at an afternoon urgent hearing, I recall defending a British tourist who was accused of causing slight injury to two uniform policemen at the then burger shop next to the Preluna Hotel. The police gave very confusing testimony of the alleged events leading up to. When the accused took the stand he finally identified himself, to the surprise of the prosecution, as an inspector with the Liverpool Police on holiday. He testified with calm credibility that his accusers wanted to jump the queue for the food counter and as he stood his ground they physically pushed him out of their way. He did not react as his training was not to do so. The magistrate found him guilty and handed out a non-custodial sentence. We left the court room but standing in the corridor, we were approached by the said magistrate who quietly apologised to my client and me saying that “his hands were tied”. We both stood there shocked and speechless till he turned and walked away from us.
The way things are done in Malta seemingly!
Some people in Malta are exempt from acting according to principles.