A Maltese citizen has just been awarded Lm2,000 in compensation after a judge ruled that a 13-year delay in the criminal proceedings filed against him was excessive and in breach of his
fundamental human rights.
The presiding judge declared that there was no doubt that a delay of 13 years in criminal proceedings was excessive, particularly when the case in question was not particularly complex and had not involved much evidence.
This notwithstanding, the case had been put off for judgement 11 years ago, but judgement had not yet been delivered.
This is an old chestnut. Our Constitution specifically provides for a system of justice that dispenses of fair hearing “within a reasonable time”, but a situation has developed where justice recedes from the citizen. Each time this happens, the worth of our Constitution is reduced to that of a piece of paper.
The least one expects is an urgent, full dress debate in Parliament, not merely to take another look at the deteriorating situation, but to agree upon a plan of action with carefully laid out
targets.
Supremacy of the law
It is, to say the least, inexplicable that most politicians are concerned about Malta’s targets in the years ahead, and show hardly any solicitous regards for a crisis situation prevailing in the here and now.
As things stand, the issue is that, no matter what the Constitution says and guarantees, court delays exceed acceptable limits in a democratic society based on the rule of law.
Whatever the cause and whoever is responsible, this situation cannot be tolerated.
Someone has to accept responsibility for taking the initiative leading to a solution, if not also to remedy what has happened in the past.
The rule of law is not only about the supremacy of the law, but also about its ability to deliver.
The Constitution provides for a Commission for the Administration of Justice. It does not seem that this Commission has successfully addressed itself to this endemic situation.
Isn’t there a Cabinet to take full responsibility for forward movement?
The issue is one that concerns the proper deployment of resources and of “output”. It is about the full use of courtrooms, mornings and afternoons, and of adequate and competent support staff, of regular reviews of caseload figures, and of maximum dedication, particularly in pursuing court cases once proceedings are set in motion
Ersatz democracy
In any democracy, justice is the most valuable resource. Unless our judicial system is sanitised, we shall have to make do with an ersatz democracy.
In latter-day Europe, this is clearly unacceptable.
In the particular case mentioned above, it results that the culpable shortcomings of whoever was responsible for a gross violation of justice are to be made good out of public funds. The injustice is being visited on the taxpayer.
Unless there is a deliberate attempt to shield the culprit or culprits, whoever was responsible should be identified and dealt with in conformity with the normal rules of accountability.
Who is there to mend the broken fence – and quickly?
Deep-seated malady
There will be those who will not be at all disturbed by this and similar developments, relying, no doubt, on the firm belief that the populace will soon forget all there is in the wash.
I believe this is the real malaise and the root of the problem. In Malta, heads never roll and many people in authority take this for granted.
As a result, the fish begins to stink at the head, as the saying goes, because there is no disposition to enforce discipline and to observe codes of ethics at all levels. The culture of resignations has found no congenial ground in Malta at the level of high authority.
It is this deep-seated malady that undermines so insidiously the rule of law. In a well-ordered society, there must be equilibrium between self-restraint and liberty.
In the final analysis, it takes political will to make sure that the equilibrium is there. It isn’t. Although the spirit may be willing, the flesh is weak.
Someone with guts must, some day, assume responsibility.
[email protected]