Malta is once again confronted with a verdict that has left much of the country stunned. The acquittal of Yorgen Fenech on charges of complicity and conspiracy in the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, followed just two months later by the acquittal of Lorin Scicluna on charges relating to the murder of Lassana Cisse, has reopened a question: is our justice system still capable of delivering the confidence that a functioning democracy desperately needs?

These are not ordinary cases. They concern two killings that have left deep scars on Maltese society. Their outcomes have inevitably raised eyebrows, fuelled anger and prompted serious questions about the institutions entrusted with pursuing justice. The concern is not simply that two defendants have walked free. It is what these verdicts, taken together, are doing to public faith in the system.

A jury is not a rubber stamp for public opinion. Its members must decide on the evidence presented, not on the anger of a nation, the reputation of an accused person, or the political climate surrounding a case. The presumption of innocence is sacrosanct. Nobody should be convicted because the public demands it, and acquittal does not, in itself, establish that justice has failed.

But this does not mean the jury system should be shielded from scrutiny. A system that has served Malta for decades is not necessarily a system beyond improvement. When verdicts in cases of such gravity leave the public questioning how justice is administered, it is legitimate to ask whether the process remains adequate, whether jurors are sufficiently equipped to assess complex evidence, and whether the safeguards surrounding trials are fit for purpose. These are questions for a serious, independent examination, not for knee-jerk condemnation.

The more damning questions, however, concern the Attorney General's Office.

The prosecution is entrusted with bringing cases before the courts and proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as required by law. That threshold is demanding for a reason. Yet when the state prosecutes cases of enormous public importance and fails to secure convictions, it cannot simply shrug its shoulders and move on. It must explain whether the failures lie in the investigations, the preparation of the evidence, the presentation of the case, or the prosecution's overall strategy.

How adequately equipped is the Attorney General's Office to handle prosecutions of this magnitude? Is it sufficiently resourced? Is its leadership capable of ensuring that the most consequential criminal cases are pursued with the competence, diligence and seriousness they demand? And, more fundamentally, what accountability exists when the public repeatedly loses confidence in the work of the prosecution?

Victoria Buttigieg cannot expect the office she leads to be beyond criticism. Calls for her resignation have been made before. The latest verdicts make those calls harder to dismiss. The issue is whether the institution under her leadership is delivering the standard of prosecution the country has every right to expect.

Malta has spent years discussing a culture of impunity. That culture was not born in a courtroom. It was nurtured when political wrongdoing was met with excuses, evasions and little meaningful accountability. When those entrusted with power appear to escape consequences, the damage extends far beyond politics.

The statement by Repubblika calling for a public, independent and rigorous examination of the administration of justice should therefore be taken seriously. Appointments, recruitment, resources, management and institutional structures must all be examined. Those leading the police and prosecution services must be answerable for the performance of the institutions they oversee.

This is not about demanding convictions. It is about demanding competence.

What message is Malta sending when two cases involving the killing of human beings end in acquittals that leave so many citizens questioning the system? What reassurance can be offered to victims and their families?

A country in which so much else appears to be crumbling cannot afford to have confidence in justice crumble with it.

The system must be examined, the failures identified and those responsible held to account. Otherwise, the culture of impunity will continue to thrive, and the public will be left wondering whether justice in this country is still something worth believing in.