A man who was sent back to prison after allegedly trying to cheat a mandatory urine drug test with a pipe while on parole has lost a bid to be temporarily released while he challenges the revocation of his parole on human rights grounds.

Jonathan Felice allegedly attempted to manipulate the test by concealing a tube in his clothing and providing a urine sample through it during an appointment with his parole officer in November 2025.

The incident was reported to the Parole Board, which subsequently revoked Felice's parole and ordered his return to prison.

But Felice is challenging that decision before the Constitutional Court, claiming his parole was revoked without him being informed beforehand of the allegations against him, being given access to the evidence, or being given an opportunity to appear before the board and defend himself.

Pending a final decision in that case, Felice asked the First Hall of the Civil Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction to order his immediate release from prison.

The court rejected that request on Thursday, finding that Felice had not, at this stage, established a prima facie violation of his fundamental rights which would justify his release as an interim measure.

The court stressed, however, that its decision concerned only Felice's request for provisional release and did not determine whether his rights were ultimately breached when his parole was revoked.

Felice had been sentenced to four years and six months in prison by the Court of Criminal Appeal in October 2022, with the sentence beginning to run in January 2023 after he had served previous sentences.

His application for parole was approved in February 2025, with the licence valid until March 2027. Had he remained in prison without being granted parole, his sentence would have expired on 12 November 2025.

Alleged attempt to manipulate urine test

The incident which led to the revocation took place on 28 November 2025, when Felice attended a scheduled appointment with his parole officer. As part of the conditions of his parole, Felice was required to undergo regular urine testing for the presence of drugs.

His parole officer subsequently reported that the nurse supervising the test had informed him that Felice was allegedly hiding a tube in his clothing and had provided the urine sample through it rather than normally.

The report reached the Parole Board on 9 December 2025 and was discussed during a meeting on 17 December, when the board decided to revoke Felice's parole for breaching its conditions.

Neither Felice nor his parole officer were called to appear or testify before the board, with the decision being taken on the basis of the report submitted to it.

Felice was returned to prison on 18 December.

On the same day, he was also arrested in connection with an alleged aggravated theft committed on 21 November 2025, while he was on parole. Those criminal proceedings remain pending.

Felice subsequently asked the Parole Board for a hearing so that he could defend himself against the allegation, but his request was rejected, and he was informed that the board's decision was final and could not be changed.

He later wrote to the board himself, giving his version of events and denying, among other things, that he had refused to provide another urine sample.

The court stressed that its decision does not determine whether Felice's fundamental rights were ultimately breached by the manner in which his parole was revoked.

That question will be decided when the court considers the merits of his constitutional case.

For the time being, his request to be released from prison pending that decision was rejected, with costs imposed against him.

Madam Justice Rachel Montebello presided over the court.

Defence lawyer Shaun Zammit represented the accused.

Lawyers Miguel De Gabriele and Maurizio Cordina appeared for the institutions.