Barristers all over England and Wales, who are members of the Criminal Bar Association, are striking because the revised legal aid fees proposed by government are still too low for the amount and the nature of the work assigned. They are not turning up for court sessions and are picketing outside the law court buildings. With a backlog of almost 60,000 cases caused by Covid shutdowns, the numbers keep mounting and it’s not a pretty picture.

I would not expect the local media to report such an event, even though there is news value in this – after all, the Gozitan lawyers did the same a few months back to highlight the lack of resources and structural issues within the court in Gozo. Sometimes one has to take drastic action to highlight serious gaps in the system.

Child advocacy is the area that I work in and as much as it has evolved especially with the introduction of Chapter 602, there’s still so much that needs to be done organisationally. In fact, there isn’t a legal notice that describes the parameters of the Child Advocate’s work in the same way that mediators have in SL12.20, for example, and issues keep arising with regards to the nature of the job, whether it’s that of a guardian ad litem or a court expert. It would also update issues such as those encountered in asking for personal data in the best interests of the child, which are currently addressed by SL586.04 regulation 2(1) and (2), but which is a struggle to attain in practice.  

There is an overlapping bracket between legal aid lawyers and child advocates in that the former can also be assigned to represent a minor as well, as SL 595.11 indicates in regulation 4(1)(c). This conflicts with article 25 of Chapter 602, which requires Child Advocates to receive specialised training whereas the same is not requested of legal aid lawyers.

There is a major payment issue, where it can only be affected once the case closes. So if a child is 15, the advocate is expected to keep following a case until such minor turns 18, unless the care order is withdrawn earlier  – that’ s three years before one gets paid, and for the exact amount of money established for the Family Court cases. Imagine being assigned to a minor who’s in kindergarten or primary school: does the current payment system make sense?

I had instances where I represented minors who were required to appear before the drugs tribunal, the local council tribunals, had other different criminal charges before the Magistrates’ Court, and had to be visited regularly at the correctional facility in Imtaħleb, or rehabilitation centres, the forensic ward, St Patrick’s, the FSWS residences or at foster parents’ residences. The effort invested in following just one minor includes calls and correspondence with related professionals and police officers, and monthly case conferences with all the therapists and social work professionals involved, online or in person, sometimes at FSWS premises. Although the Juvenile Court venue was moved from Santa Venera to Valletta, travelling between the two localities can easily resume with the planned functioning of the Children’s House, which is located in the B’Kara/ Santa Venera area.  It truly looks and sounds like a full-time job.

While it is something that I would still gladly do, it’s definitely not because of the income. Before the Court Agency was established, Child Advocates were employed as part-timers, and so anything that cropped up was duly covered by the salary, just as legal aid lawyers and judicial assistants are organised after all. Perhaps this makes more sense than being paid for each individual case, but this is a personal opinion.

There’s one other issue: Bill 225, which amends the Immigration Act to indicate the CEO of AWAS as the interim legal guardian of unaccompanied migrant children, without mentioning how legal services will be provided, and hopefully through child advocates. In 12 years of doing this, I have only had two cases of unaccompanied children, and surely there is more to this in numbers – it’s a mystery how child advocates have not been involved with migrant children so far. Why aren’t such minors represented by Child Advocates when Chapter 602 clearly refers to all children in Malta, unaccompanied minors included? And doesn’t Child Protection Services already have a unit that deals with unaccompanied children, so why reinvent the wheel?

It's about time that the role of the Child Advocate is updated through a proper study of such a role. There was recently a task force set up within the Justice Ministry to study parental alienation, so why not have a similar exercise with regards to the role of Child Advocate?