Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1467182
maltatoday | SUNDAY • 8 MAY 2022 10 NEWS Spiteri gets measly €2,000 in fair trial complaint MATTHEW AGIUS DISBARRED lawyer Patrick Spiteri will receive just €2,000 out of a total €198,000 he had demanded in compensation from the State, under a judge- ment by the European Court of Human Rights on a com- plaint about the inordinate length of criminal proceed- ings against him. The facts of the case date back to 2001 when Spiteri had first been questioned by the police as part of a magis- terial inquiry into suspected money laundering. In 2008 he was questioned by the police again and later charged with forgery and misappropria- tion of funds which occurred in 2007 and earlier. On 10 December 2008 Spiteri was committed to trial. Following a number of hear- ings which Spiteri failed to attend and requests for ad- journment by the prosecu- tion, at the end of 2010 evi- dence started to be collected from five different jurisdic- tions through letters rogatory. In July 2012 the prosecution declared it had no further ev- idence to submit. Spiteri had stopped attending the crimi- nal hearings and in June 2014 it emerged that he had left for the United Kingdom, in order to be treated for Bechet's syn- drome – a rare multisystem inflammatory disorder – and claimed that he was not med- ically fit to return to Malta. Following extradition pro- ceedings, Spiteri returned to Malta in May 2017 and lodged a number of requests mainly in relation to the col- lection of evidence. Some 16 hearings took place until May 2019 when the proceedings had to be suspended, pending the outcome of constitutional proceedings filed by Spiteri, in which he raised the com- plaint about the length of the ongoing criminal proceedings against him. In March 2020, the First Hall of the Civil Court, in its con- stitutional competence, had rejected all Spiteri's claims on the merits. With regards to the length of proceedings, the court had considered that the starting point for the calcula- tion had to be 2008 as Spiteri had not proved that he had been aware that he was being investigated prior to being ar- rested in 2008. A subsequent appeal was also dismissed by the Consti- tutional Court in July 2020, which agreed with 2008 being the starting point of criminal proceedings, as his 2001 in- terrogation had nothing to do with the charges he faced in 2008. But the complaint was ruled to be unfounded by that court, which held that it had been evident that Spiteri had contributed a great deal to the delays. The ECHR, composed of Mr. Justice Krzysztof Wojtyczek, presiding together with judges Erik Wennerström and Maltese judge Lorraine Schembri Orland, reiterat- ed that in criminal matters, the length of proceedings are measured from the moment a person is charged and not from the beginning of the in- vestigation. While both Spiteri and the Maltese State had contrib- uted to the extension of the criminal proceedings the ECHR said it had "no doubt" that Spiteri had put in place a number of delaying tactics which exceeded mere pro- cedural and defence rights, pointing out that even be- fore the ECHR itself, he had "repeatedly referred to com- plaints declared inadmissible or in any event falling outside the scope of the complaint communicated to the Gov- ernment." "Ultimately, proceedings were indeed significantly compounded and delayed as a result of the applicant's prolonged absence and the necessity to have him repatri- ated via extradition proceed- ings, and a series of connected problems which came to be only as a result of the appli- cant's choice to leave Malta during his criminal proceed- ings," ruled the court. Nevertheless, it held that his right to trial had been breached, saying that it "could not ignore a delay of around three years imputable to the Maltese authorities, a delay which cannot be explained by the complexity of the case, as evidenced by the fact that the prosecution had already closed its evidence in 2012." The court accepted that in spite of the increased com- plexity in prosecuting finan- cial crimes and the require- ment of cooperation and assistance from foreign juris- dictions, this had not been the cause of the delay in Spiteri's case. On his claim for costs, the ECHR, having observed that fact that the costs related to the criminal proceedings had no connection with the rights violation found, and that most of the applicant's claims before the constitu- tional jurisdictions as well as before it had been rejected, the court said it was reasona- ble to award Spiteri €2,000 to cover costs. Lawyers Ian Refalo, Mark Refalo and Sarah Grech rep- resented Spiteri in the ECHR proceedings. Patrick Spiteri THE Labour Party has pledged to update the law regulating in vitro fertilisation within the first 100 days of government but has so far refrained from providing detail. The PL manifesto speaks of "widening the scientific proce- dures" to give couples with multi- ple unsuccessful IVF treatments, or who have a medical history, or who have had multiple mis- carriages, the chance to become parents. When contacted by MaltaTo- day, a health ministry spokesper- son said that an announcement on IVF amendments "will be made in due course." The most obvious inference from the manifesto pledge is the introduction of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) to en- sure that only healthy embryos are transferred to the woman. PGD is not currently offered as a treatment option since the exist- ing law makes it illegal to discard embryos that are not deemed to be suitable for implantation due to heridetary conditions or dis- eases. The IVF law was amended in 2018 to allow for embryo freez- ing, sperm and egg donation, the fertilisation of up to five eggs, and the possibility of single women and lesbians to access the treat- ment. Government already covers the cost of IVF cycles, which cost be- tween €15,000 and €20,000 each and has pledged to start covering the hormone treatment required in the run-up to the procedure. But what would IVF specialists like to see in the fresh round of reforms being contemplated? MaltaToday spoke to Dr Chris- tine Schembri Deguara from Hope Fertility & IVF, who special- ises in IVF and fertility issues, and senior embryologist Paul Sultana, a laboratory director at MLS Ad- vanced Ltd, to gauge their views. Schembri Deguara said that she hoped the IVF reforms would in- clude increasing the age limit of women eligible for IVF treatment and allow doctors to screen em- bryos before implantation. She also believes surrogacy should be made an option. Sultana, a pioneer of IVF in Mal- ta along with doctors Josie Mus- cat and Mark Brincat, said the IVF reforms should include the permission to use all the oocytes retrieved during an IVF cycle, effectively removing the limit of having only five fertilised eggs. He also believes the law should move away from a one-size-fits- all policy, giving specialists more leeway to adapt treatments to their patient's needs. Both Sultana and Schembri De- guara agreed that PGD should be introduced for specific circum- stances when deemed appropri- ate by the specialist. Does the current law restrict IVF? Existing legislation allows for the creation of up to five embryos at one go. Schembri Deguara said in a "perfect world", they would be able to fertilise more eggs. How- ever, she argued that there were ways to mitigate this by testing the eggs and sperm to ensure bet- ter quality embryos are created. "In a perfect world it's best to fertilise more eggs because this is going to give you more embryos and statistically, a higher chance to achieve good results. Howev- er, if you are able to choose those eggs that are good quality and IVF: what reform are Maltese specialists expecting? Government has pledged to reform IVF legislation within the first 100 days of office. Laura Calleja spoke to two IVF specialists about what they would like to see changed