Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1425206
4 NEWS maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 3 NOVEMBER 2021 NEWS NICOLE MEILAK JASON Azzopardi will not retract claims that Rosianne Cutajar swore at him in a 2018 parlia- mentary debate, despite having breached par- liamentary privilege when doing so. "You can't hide the truth. I am so sure of where the truth lies that I won't even appeal the ruling," he wrote on Facebook in reaction to the ruling Azzopardi plans on having Yorgen Fenech, Diane Izzo, Edward Zammit Lewis, Keith Schembri and Joseph Muscat, among others, to testify before the privileges committee that will review the issue. Speaker Anglu Farrugia ruled on Tuesday that Azzopardi breached privilege by alleging that Rosianne Cutajar used vulgar language against him three years ago during a parlia- mentary debate. The ruling is a result of a complaint filed by Cutajar on Monday, which centred on a Face- book post uploaded by Azzopardi. In it, he claimed that Cutajar spoke vulgar- ly against him during a parliamentary debate three years ago. The Speaker ruled that there was a prima facie breach of privilege when he uploaded the post. He based his ruling on the transcripts of the heated debate, arguing that nothing in the transcripts could have backed up Azzopardi's claims. There were no complaints raised on vulgar language, nor any interruptions, the Speaker argued. In light of the ruling, Jason Azzopardi will be formally requested to retract his state- ment. The 2018 parliamentary debate saw MPs go head-to-head on the Dubai-based company 17 Black. It was held after Yorgen Fenech was re- vealed to be the owner of 17 Black. The secret company was set up to transfer money into the offshore company accounts owned by former minister Konrad Mizzi and ex-chief of staff Keith Schembri. Rosianne Cutajar enjoyed a very close rela- tionship with Yorgen Fenech. Cutajar alleg- edly received some €50,000 while acting as a broker to Fenech in securing a property deal. She denied this, but admitted to receiving €9,000 in cash from Fenech as a birthday gift. Jason Azzopardi stands by claims that Rosianne Cutajar swore at him Azzopardi will be ordered to retract his claims that Rosianne Cutajar swore at him during a parliamentary debate Jason Azzopardi Rosianne Cutajar MATTHEW AGIUS A judge has ordered the retrial of a company director who had been jailed, after being found responsi- ble for a 2008 incident, in which a teenager was left paralysed after a lighting structure collapsed on her. Maurice Attard of Sonlit Ltd had been sentenced to 10 months' im- prisonment for criminal negligence and causing grievous bodily harm, in 2016. Sonlit Ltd had been sub- contracted to install a truss, from which lighting equipment was sus- pended, at an open-air public disco in a parking area in St Paul's Bay. Some three hours into the party, strong winds had caused the struc- ture and the heavy spotlights to col- lapse, injuring eight people. Vlada Kravchenko was just 17 when she suffered a spinal cord in- jury, as a result of the collapse, and is now constrained to use a wheel- chair. The Ukrainian teenager had just arrived at the party, when the scaffolding collapsed. Attard had filed an appeal against his conviction, arguing amongst other things, that the Court of Mag- istrates had not asked the accused whether he wished to be tried sum- marily or before the Criminal Court – an important point of procedure. The defect in formality occurred in 2010, and the case subsequently passed through the hands of three different magistrates. In his submissions before the ap- pellate court, the Attorney General confirmed that the accused had not been asked this question, but argued that this did not bring about the nullity of the proceedings because the defence had not raised it before the Court of Magistrates, which had continued to hear all the evidence in the case, including the testimony of the accused himself. Mr Justice Giovanni Grixti, pre- siding the court of Criminal Appeal, noted that at the time of Attard's conviction, the Court of Magis- trates' competence had increased, allowing it to hear cases punishable by up to two years' imprisonment. The court had started compiling evidence in the man's case as it in- itially did not have the Attorney General's consent to hear the case summarily. When the AG did, even- tually, request the case to be tried summarily, the court had been legal- ly obliged to ask the accused, wheth- er he had any objection to this. Attard alleged that he was never asked this question. The prosecu- tion argued that this consent was tacit, as he had not only let proceed- ings continue, but had also testified in them. Deciding the case, the judge em- phasised that the first court had to ask the accused whether he con- sented to summary proceedings or not. This essential formality could not be inferred, said the judge, ex- plaining that the absence of it was fatal to the case. Lawyer Giannella De Marco ap- peared as defence counsel to Attard. Court orders retrial of company director jailed for scaffolding collapse that paralysed teenager