Tempers flared in the courtroom on Friday afternoon, as lawyers defending Vince Muscat clashed with a prosecutor over whether or not convicted bank robber Daren Debono could legally be allowed to testify against Muscat in criminal proceedings about that same bank robbery, as he is currently interdicted for perjury.

Magistrate Monica Vella heard the, at times heated, submissions in the first sitting of the newly re-opened compilation of evidence against Muscat. Muscat’s trial for his part in the 2010 botched hold-up of the HSBC Headquarters was supposed to start earlier this month, but was derailed by the last-minute admission made by his co-accused by Daren Debono it-Topo, following a plea deal with the prosecution.

Debono was sentenced to imprisonment for ten and a half years and had an attempted murder charge dropped, in return for his testimony in the trial against Muscat, in a deal reached at around 8pm on the eve of the trial.

When the trial was convened, Muscat’s lawyers had vociferously objected to the newly convicted Debono being produced as a prosecution witness. They argued that he had not been heard as part of the compilation of evidence and that this had deprived them of the opportunity to hear what he had to say and prepare their defence accordingly.

The Criminal Court subsequently sent the case back to the court of magistrates, so that compilation proceedings could resume and the new witness be heard.

Magistrate Monica Vella scheduled a sitting this afternoon, so that Debono’s testimony could start being heard, but when the case was called on Friday, Muscat’s Lawyers Franco Debono and Roberto Montalto objected to his testimony, arguing that any testimony he would tender would not be admissible, in view of the fact that he was an accomplice in the trial for which Muscat was on trial for. In addition to this, they brought to the attention of the court the fact that in 2017, Debono had already been convicted of perjury and fabricating evidence in a similar criminal case.

As a result of that case, in which Debono had admitted guilt, the court had placed him under a 20-year general interdiction, which rendered him an inadmissible witness, argued the defence.

Prosecuting lawyer Giannella Busuttil, from the Office of the Attorney General, rebutted, saying that these were submissions that should have been made before the Criminal Court, and arguing that the scope of these proceedings before the Court of Magistrates had been limited by the superior court to only hear Debono’s testimony and allow for his cross-examination before he tendered evidence in Muscat’s trial by jury.

Lawyer Franco Debono then challenged the AG’s right of audience in these proceedings, saying he had doubts “that the AG even has a right of audience before the compiling court, as this is reserved to the police.”

The magistrate announced that she will be delivering a ruling on the issues raised and scheduled the next sitting for the morning of February 3, in which she is expected to give a decision. If the prosecution’s requests are upheld, Debono will testify on that day.