Repubblika on  Monday expressed its anger, disappointment and profound concern at the jury's verdict acquitting Lorin Scicluna of the murder of Lassana Cisse and the attempted murder of three other people.

As we said following the verdict in the trial of Yorgen Fenech, we respect the court's verdict, but we disagree with it. In light of the evidence and testimony heard in court, we find it extremely difficult to understand how this conclusion was reached, the civil society group said in a statement.

"We cannot ignore the fact that, once again, our justice system has failed to provide a satisfactory answer to a murder that shocked the conscience of the country.

"We are increasingly concerned that justice in Malta is not always blind to the identity of the victim. We ask whether skin colour, origin, social standing, or the perception that certain victims are less deserving of sympathy and solidarity are influencing the outcomes of judicial proceedings. This is a terrible question for a democracy to have to ask. But failing to ask it would be worse."

Our criticism is not directed at those state officials, police officers, prosecutors and members of the judiciary who perform their duties with competence, integrity and conscience. But respect for these individuals cannot become an excuse for refusing to examine the failures of the system in which they work, the group said.

It is time to acknowledge that we have a serious problem. We need a public, independent and rigorous examination of the administration of justice, including decisions concerning appointments, recruitment, management, resources and the structures of the police, prosecution services and courts. Those who lead these institutions must be held accountable for their outcomes. The reforms our country has needed for years can no longer be postponed, the statement added.

This is not a call to convict people without evidence or to disregard the presumption of innocence. It is a call for the state to be capable of investigating, prosecuting and adjudicating serious crimes in a manner that inspires confidence in justice.

Because justice is not merely a matter of procedure. It is the fundamental promise that everyone who lives among us is entitled to the equal protection of the law. When that promise loses its credibility, everyone's security is weakened, the cohesion of our society is fractured, and our democracy itself is placed at risk.

Today we remember Lassana Cisse. A father of two who was walking home after watching a football match. He threatened no one. He did nothing to deserve to be shot and killed. His life was worth exactly as much as the life of every one of us.

Proceedings against another person accused in connection with this murder remain pending, and that person's presumption of innocence must be respected. But seven and a half years after the killing, Lassana's family is still waiting for justice, the group said.

Momentum also expressed its deep concern at the outcome of the trial over the killing of Lassana Cisse.

Seven years ago, a father of two was shot dead while walking home in Ħal Far. Three other men were attacked. Today, nobody has been held responsible.

The accused told the court he drove the car that night, that the car's number plates were removed and that their phones were left behind on purpose. He told the court that he and his companion had previously driven around Ħal Far "looking for black people" to harass.

A jury has given its verdict, but Maltese citizens have every right to ask how a case with these admissions ended with no one answering for a man's murder, the party said.

What is the punishment in Malta for deliberately running someone over? Is removing a number plate treated more seriously than one life lost and three more put at risk? The jury was told that shared intent could amount to complicity.

Why was the prosecution unable to prove it? The Attorney General owes the public an explanation of how this case was built and presented.

The acquittal of Lorin Scicluna inevitably brings back memories of the Yorgen Fenech case. Both cases raise important questions about the ability of our institutions to establish the full chain of responsibility, particularly when defendants acknowledge significant connections to the people and circumstances surrounding the crimes but deny responsibility for the murders, the party added.

"We must also ask the question many are already asking. Why did it take seven years for this case to reach a jury? Over seven years, memories fade, evidence weakens and families are left waiting. Justice delayed this long is justice denied."