A Civil Court today rejected claims made by Salvatori Olivieri that he is facing degrading and inhuman treatment due to the fact that in Malta, the punishment for cultivating and trafficking drugs is the same.

Mr Olivieri is facing drug trafficking proceedings over the cultivation of cannabis plants. He filed a case in the First Hall of the Civil Court against the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Police.

Mr Olivieri argued that he is a victim of an “unjust” and “abusive” legal system. He was arrested on 30 April, 2012 after police raided his Zebbug home after they were tipped-off. Mr Olivieri had been accused of trafficking cannabis after police found eight cannabis plants.

The police inspector had explained to him that the courts in Malta make no distinction between cultivating and trafficking and that the sentence given to an individual found to be cultivating cannabis plants is equivalent to trafficking. The sentence handed to the guilty party in such cases is an effective prison sentence of between six months and 10 years.

In his testimony, Mr Olivieri said that sentences given by Italy’s courts in such cases are not as harsh as those handed down in Malta, apart from the fact that cultivating and trafficking are not considered the same in Italy either.

He argued that he could not understand why he is being charged with trafficking when no proof was presented that shows he was trafficking the drugs.

Inspector Herman Mula explained that when Mr Olivieri was given the right to a legal representative, Mr Olivieri had chosen not to have a lawyer represent him. The inspector said that the accused had admitted that the plants were his and explained to them that he cultivated the plants because he was fascinated by them. He also said that the accused told him that he does not abuse of the drug.

The proceedings in front of a criminal court are still under way.

In the case filed in front of a Civil Court, Mr Olivieri said that the charges go against the Constitution and the European Convention on human rights.

On his part, the Attorney General argued that the EU Charter of Fundamental Human Rights was not applicable as no EU laws were being impugned. The complaint emanated from domestic legislation and therefore was beyond the scope of this charter. The AG also pointed out that the pending criminal proceedings had not yet been decided and therefore it could not be said with any certainty that he would be found guilty.

While the court agreed that this was a dispute which concerned a national law and that the EU Charter on fundamental human rights was not applicable, it disagreed with the Attorney General’s assertion that pending criminal proceedings must necessarily be concluded before filing such a case.

On the point that Mr Olivieri raised, that the courts do not distinguish between cultivation and trafficking and that this constitutes degrading treatment, the court argued that the simple fact that the punishment was the same for both crimes does not constitute degrading treatment since the State would still be obliged to guarantee the dignity of the prisoner.

Judge Joseph Zammit Mc Keon presided over the case.