The Constitutional Court upheld the appeal of Sebastian Dalli, confirming that his right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time had been violated in the drug trafficking case against him, and consequently ordered the prosecution to declare its case closed within two months.
Dalli is brother to former minister and disgraced EU commissioner John Dalli.
The First Hall of the Civil Court had declared that Dalli's fundamental right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time under Article 39(1) of the Constitution of Malta and Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights had been breached.
In February 2009, Dalli had been charged with conspiring to deal in cannabis after 30 kilos of the "drug" were intercepted on a yacht arriving from Libya. It later turned out the "drug" was soap.
After twelve years, the proceedings were still at the prosecution evidence stage, and the Attorney General had not yet issued a bill of indictment.
On 30 October 2018, Police had declared that they had no further evidence to present. Despite this, between October 2018 and March 2020, several sittings were still held to ask whether the prosecution had more evidence to produce. In March 2020, the Attorney General presented a new list of witnesses, including alleged accomplices and co-accused. Proceedings were later suspended due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Following this, the defence informed the court that they were going to file a constitutional application, with Dalli arguing that the excessive delay in proceedings violated his right to a fair hearing under Article 6 of the ECHR. The Attorney General had replied that there was no fixed time limit for completing proceedings and that each case must be assessed on its own merits.
Thus, on July 2022, the First Hall declared that Dalli's right to a fair hearing was undoubtedly breached through the prosecution's behaviour.
Despite the ruling being in his favour, Dalli appealed, arguing that the First Hall correctly found a violation but failed to provide an effective remedy. Dalli held that the court should have ordered the closure of the prosecution's evidence and directed the Attorney General to issue the bill of indictment.
He further stated that the delays were entirely attributable to the prosecution, which repeatedly requested adjournments after declaring that no evidence remained. To this, the Attorney General countered that they were handling a complex case involving multiple accused and witnesses and that investigations were ongoing.
In its decision, the court noted that the proceedings against Dalli had been pending since February 2009, with no progress toward trial and that none of the delay was attributable to the accused. The prolonged stagnation of proceedings was caused by prosecutorial inaction and inefficient communication between the Attorney General's Office and the Prosecuting Officer.
The Court reaffirmed that although the First Hall's primary function is to address the constitutional question referred to it, a mere finding of a violation without an effective remedy would be inadequate and run counter to the principle of judicial economy.
Thus, the Constitutional Court upheld the appeal, confirming that the appellant suffered a violation of his fundamental rights and that the costs of the proceedings are to be borne by the Attorney General. The Court also found the grievance of the appellant to be well-founded and accordingly, ordered the closure of the prosecution's evidence within two months from the date of the judgment.
Superintendent Johann J Fenech prosecuted. Dalli was assisted by defence lawyers Jacob Magri and Arthur Azzopardi .
The court was presided over by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti, Judge Giannino Caruana Demajo and Judge Anthony Ellul