Prime Minister Robert Abela has insisted that there had been "absolutely no interference" in the judiciary from his time as a lawyer, and dismissed the episode cited by Judge Lawrence Mintoff in his letter published on Tuesday as "dead and buried," as the row over the appointment of the next Chief Justice intensified.

Replying to questions from journalists outside Parliament on Tuesday, Abela said that when he tried speaking in Parliament moments earlier, he had been interrupted by the Opposition Leader to the extent that the Speaker had to suspend the plenary session.

Abela said he had "full respect" towards Judge Lawrence Mintoff and the judiciary, insisting he had absolutely never interfered in judicial matters, as he rebutted allegations emerging from a letter sent by the sitting Judge to Cabinet members, regarding the appointment of the next Chief Justice.

Abela said that in his brief parliamentary speech, he said he had expressed full respect towards Judge Mintoff and the entire judiciary, and that on the content of the letter sent by Judge Mintoff, he would be asked about it by the Commissioner for Standards for the Judiciary during his investigation.

He believed that was the adequate forum in which to make his comments, and not in the public eye.

Responding to allegations that he had refused to appoint one of the Opposition's proposed candidates because it would upset Labour party diehards and raise Opposition Leader Alex Borg's stature, Abela said that PN justice spokesperson Joe Giglio, Justice Minister Jonathan Attard, himself and the Opposition Leader had met at Castille, where they agreed on a number of criteria for the appointment of the next Chief Justice.

He said the main criterion clearly agreed upon by all parties was that the eventual Chief Justice would not have too long nor too short a term.

This, he explained, was to avoid a situation where a case heard before a Chief Justice would have to start from the beginning if another Chief Justice had to be appointed shortly afterwards.

He described the meeting with the Opposition as one that ended with a sense of positive progress.

On allegations that, when he was a lawyer and MP, he had put pressure on the judiciary and threatened to sack a Court employee over the Paqpaqli incident case, Abela urged journalists to be faithful to what was said in Judge Mintoff's letter.

He said that in that specific case, a Court sentence on the six cases had not even been issued due to out-of-court settlements. "The Judge's comment was not about the sentence. I was shocked to see so many reports and commentators earlier today who said that I tried to interfere in a court sentence, which is not at all the case. Not only was there no judgement, but we are talking about an episode where Judge Mintoff himself says happened weeks after the case ended. How can the reports talk about interference on the work of the judiciary when the judiciary is not even involved, and Judge Mintoff himself says this," Abela said.

Asked if he denied all allegations of threats towards the judiciary, he reiterated that the media must remain loyal to what Judge Mintoff wrote.

"Unlike what is unfortunately being reported, Judge Mintoff never said that I, in some way or another, have tried to interfere in a court sentence - because there were none - or that I have interfered in the judiciary's work, because the episode he referred to, the exercise on the Court taxes, is something which the judiciary does not even get into, as Judge Mintoff also said in his letter," Abela said, adding that the matter was a function of the Court Registrar.

He said there had been a lack of agreement on how the taxes were calculated, and that was the episode "from beginning to end."

"There was a lack of agreement in that episode, but for me, it is dead and buried, aqua passata, and certainly does not impose on the decision of the next Chief Justice," Abela said.

"There was absolutely no interference on any member of the judiciary, and if I am asked before the Commissioner for Standards, I am ready to repeat that I have never interfered in the judiciary's work, and Judge Mintoff never says that I tried to interfere in his judgements, or in anything relating to him, and the response one can find automatically in the letter," Abela said.

Asked whether he would abstain from negotiations on the next Chief Justice, Abela said he could not abdicate from a primary function imposed on him by the Constitution.

"My work is to keep criticism purely related to the eventual choice, and I will continue to serve this function loyally as I have done to this day," he said.

He denied that he was delaying the appointment until after the next general election, saying it was the government that had been criticised for presenting a motion nominating Judge Consuelo Scerri Herrera for the post.

He said the Opposition had, to this day, not given a reason for voting against Scerri Herrera, and that the government had subsequently nominated Judge Miriam Hayman.

According to agreed criteria, government had gone to the Opposition with Hayman's name during a meeting between Minister Jonathan Attard and PN MP Joe Giglio, he said.

"That name was given to the Opposition, which had up until yesterday to reply, and it was a timeframe which the Opposition itself stipulated. A response on whether they agreed with the nomination was to arrive yesterday, however Giglio spoke to Attard and said that the Opposition had no response," Abela said.

"I ask, who is deluding this process? I again appeal to the Opposition to come with a definitive answer, a yes or no, on the government's nomination for the next Chief Justice," he said.

Abela said that while he believed the appointment must be made as quickly as possible, "the ball is in the Opposition's court".

"And the Opposition cannot continue kicking the ball forward. If the Opposition says no to the government's nomination, it must give a reason why too," he said.

Asked whether he had always proceeded ethically as a lawyer, Abela said that if he had acted unethically in an episode that happened around seven years ago, a report would have been made and an investigation held.

"On this episode, I have no difficulties in answering if the Commissioner for Standards sends for me, however, I have full respect towards Judge Mintoff and I believe his letter was motivated by his wish to serve his country," Abela said.

"Whether or not that was the way he should have expressed his wish is another question. It was not a question of him wanting the role at all costs, but he believes he is the person suitable for serving in this role, and has expressed his wish in that manner," Abela continued.

On the Paqpaqli case, he said he had done his job as he was meant to, and that he had communicated with the Court Registrar and not the judiciary.

"I expressed what I needed to express but I assure you that for me, this episode is buried, and stopped there completely, so much so that I completely forgot about it," he said.

Abela confirmed he had not spoken to Judge Mintoff on Tuesday, and that discussions on the next Chief Justice had not been suspended.

Asked whether Judge Mintoff's role remained tenable, Abela said he did not consider a person's conduct based solely on an isolated episode but on the course of years.

"Over the years, Judge Mintoff showed correctness and integrity in the way he performed his duties in the role. Over the years he showed he is a judge of calibre, and it is not in my remit to prejudice. If I felt that there was the need for disciplinary procedures, I would have referred that letter to the authority that investigates these allegations. That I did not do, and the lack of action from my side shows that," Abela said.

Abela said he wished for Judge Mintoff to continue serving in his role, and the discussions on the next Chief Justice are yet to be closed.

"What interests me is not only that the position is filled but also that it does not damage our courts. I understand this is an unusual episode but one must keep it in the context of what happened, of the disappointment of a person who wishes to serve his country," Abela said.

He absolutely denied that the episode amounted to a constitutional crisis, insisting there was "certainly no form of constitutional crises" and urged the media to refrain from saying that he had interfered in the judiciary's work.