Magistrate Rachel Montebello just delivered a fatal blow to Labour’s attempts to deprive the nation of its right to freedom of expression. In a devastating judgement, the Magistrate decried the sheer abuse of state funds to throttle free speech. The nation owes the Magistrate eternal gratitude for defending us from Labour’s ruthlessness.

In an outstanding defence of our most important basic right, the Magistrate ruled that “if state funds, that after all are derived from citizens’ taxes, can be allowed to be used to bring defamatory actions against those same citizens for criticising or condemning public administration, this constitutes a serious interference in the right to free expression of opinion”.

The Court ruled that Labour, through Transport Malta (TM), used public funds to persecute a private citizen who had the temerity to label the transport authority “the Mafia authority” on a Facebook post.

That man was Joseph Emanuel Galea.  He had good reason for calling TM’s actions “Mafia-style” and for denouncing the authority’s customer care office for concealing irregularities. TM had ruined his life.

Galea had been operating as a “burdnar” for nine years when TM arbitrarily decided not to reissue his HQ plates required for his business vehicles. TM insisted Galea required authorisation from the Customs department.  But Galea was already registered as a haulier with the same authority and rightly argued he was already transporting international and national freight. But TM wouldn’t budge.  It deprived Galea of his income bringing his business to a halt.

When Galea repeatedly attempted to communicate with TM, both by phone and email, he was consistently ignored. Galea claimed he was “threatened by TM’s CEO Joe Bugeja who knows I am right”.  “I hope he’s not executing some order from the Minister who threatened me over the mobile phone of his secretary”, Galea commented.

In utter desperation Galea resorted to Facebook calling TM a Mafia authority.  His emails condemned TM for their “Mafia-style” actions.

In retaliation TM sued Galea for defamation and claimed financial damages from him for harming its reputation.  TM threatened Galea with criminal procedures. For almost four years Galea was dragged before the courts to fight TM’s vindictive revenge. To achieve its intended objective of completely destroying him TM used public funds. Lawyers, paid by our taxes, pursued Galea for years. Not only was Galea’s business ruined but he was burdened with legal fees to defend himself against TM’s vexatious claims.

TM knew it had no case.  It realised it could never win. TM was well aware it was squandering our money simply to inflict misery on the man who dared condemn its abusive actions.  TM didn’t even bother to submit the alleged defamatory e-mails to the court.  The Facebook posts TM presented weren’t even dated.

TM couldn’t win because the defamation law stipulates that only profit-making organisations who suffer financial losses can claim to have been slandered.  The Court pointed out that “It is obvious to the court that TM is not a profit-making oragnisation and therefore can never suffer financial damages as a result of defamatory declarations. The authority is nothing but a governmental institution”.

The court noted that TM “acts on the instructions and direction of the responsible minister and reports to the same Minister……the political direction that should be followed and political decisions are the prerogative of the Minister”.  The court lumped the minister with responsibility for TM’s abusive action.

“Governmental and other such bodies performing public functions are prevented completely from suing for defamation,” the court declared, not only because the prospect of damage to the government authority is “completely non-existent” but because suing for defamation “is considered a tool to undermine the right to freedom of expression”.

Magistrate Montebello quoted Lord Keith highlighting the dangerous repercussions of government entities abusing the Defamation Act to harass, intimidate and silence critics.  “What has been described as ‘the chilling effect’ induced by the threat of civil action for libel is very important ….this may prevent the publication of matters which is very desirable to make public”.

Magistrate Montebello courageously exposed the real intent behind TM’s libel action against Galea - to silence critics.  It wanted to make an example out of Galea to show everybody else it won’t stop at anything to extract revenge out of those who dare criticise it or expose its irregularities.

In her exquisite judgement, Magistrate Montebello quoted the Australian Supreme Court: “The idea of a democracy is that people are encouraged to express their criticisms…of elected government institutions, in the expectation that this process will improve the quality of the government.  To treat government institutions as having “a governing reputation” which the common law will protect against criticism on the part of citizens is, to my mind, incongruous”.

The court gave Labour a humiliating lesson in basic democracy. “The rationale of the prohibition (that democratically elected bodies may not maintain actions for defamation), is that it is of the highest public importance that such bodies be open to uninhibited public criticism”.

Magistrate Montebello went further. She not only upheld the right to criticise government and its authorities but harshly denounced Labour for using public funds to inflict “serious interference to the right to free expression of opinion”.

The Court rejected outright TM’s claims and condemned the authority to pay all expenses. Not only has Labour squandered tens of thousands of our taxes in lawyers’ fees to harass a private citizen but we’ll also be paying all court expenses incurred.

Those costs should not be borne by the taxpayer. They should be paid by whoever gave instructions to pursue that vindictive lawsuit. The nation should know who it was - TM’s CEO? The Minister? And which Minister? Ian Borg or Aaron Farrugia?

What is certain is that in the face of Labour's public intimidation of the judiciary, the Magistrate stood strong. She bravely defended our democracy - a true hero. When a magistrate has to stop government using taxpayers’ money to oppress its own people, maybe it’s time for the people to wake up.