Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/260953
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 16 FEBRUARY 2014 2014 9 MATTHEW VELLA JOURNALISTS and politicians all have their own views as to why certain judges and magistrates do what they do: the law courts have long been divided between "Nation- alist" and "Labourite" members of the bench – even though this does not mean that they do not decide ac- cording to what the law says. But there is no denying that politics is the key determinant in the game being played out by both Labour and the PN as to how to bring about Judge Lino Farrugia Sacco's ousting from the bench. The PN say any delay on Labour's part in bringing about the judge's inevitable fate, would be a sign that the government is not keen in up- holding the integrity of the judiciary. Labour accused the PN of using the impeachment as a political tool after the fall of the Gonzi administration in December 2012, five years after a first decision by the Commission for the Administration of Justice. Chief justice and judge The latest game-changer was the Commission for the Administration of Justice's refusal to entertain a sec- ond motion of impeachment filed by Joseph Muscat, and to carry out a sec- ond investigation. With six months left to his retire- ment, it was believed that a new round of hearings would not be over until Farrugia Sacco's hangs up his robe. But by reconfirming the original decision – which found that Farrugia Sacco had "misbehaved" by retain- ing his post of president of the Malta Olympic Committee in breach of the judiciary's code of ethics – the CAJ showed itself unwilling to entertain any more delays. Behind this unexpected decision, is the feud between Farrugia Sacco and chief justice Silvio Camilleri, who presides the CAJ since the President of the Republic George Abela has had to recuse himself (Abela had repre- sented the judge during hearings in 2007 over his insistence to occupy the MOC role). Farrugia Sacco last week complained to the Speaker of the House that he is being denied a fair hearing. The CAJ on the other hand, is unwilling to give the judge any elbow room to scupper the impeachment. Farrugia Sacco has always been a personae non gratae to the National- ist establishment. A new code of eth- ics in 2004 demanded that judges step down from positions as such as Far- rugia Sacco's, who was president of the Malta Olympic Committee. In February 2006 he was informed in writing that his MOC presidency was incompatible with his role as judge, and asked to resign. In 2007, he was formally told by the CAJ that his conflict was in breach of the judi- ciary's code of ethics. Farrugia Sacco was subsequently omitted from the Republic Day celebrations of 2007 in a clear attempt on the part of the administration to force him to resign the MOC post. The then-education and sports minister Louis Galea also boycotted the MOC's sports awards in 2007 – when the MOC criticised sports laws which they claimed threatened its autonomy, Galea re- sponded by pointing out Farrugia Sacco's conflict of interest, as a judge "wearing the cap of MOC president [taking] a position against an act of parliament in public circumstances outside the judicial process." The final straw came in June 2012 when Sunday Times of London re- porters secretly filmed a meeting with Farrugia Sacco in an attempt- ing at buying the MOC's allocation Sochi winter games tickets, so that they could resell them elsewhere. Although in a subsequent investiga- tion by the International Olympic Commission's ethics commission did not issue any sanctions or reprimand against the judge, it said Farrugia Sacco had "allowed the journalists to prove their point" in a discussion on the authorised ticket reselling for the Sochi games. In the meantime, the justice minis- ter at the time asked the Commission for the Administration of Justice to investigate the case. But it was only five days after Law- rence Gonzi's government fell, that the embattled prime minister decided on 15 December 2012 to file an im- peachment motion. Speedy commission hearings Unofficially, the country was in elec- tion mode; Farrugia Sacco's son David was a candidate for Labour. The CAJ's first hearings took place at breakneck speed, meeting six times between January and March 2013 and steam- ing ahead despite the judge's attempt in the Constitutional Court to recuse two members of the CAJ he believed were politically biased (retired judge Victor Caruana Colombo, for being appointed by Lawrence Gonzi; and Chamber of Advocates president Re- uben Balzan, a campaigner for Simon Busuttil's bid to become PN deputy leader). This was at a time when Gonzi vow- ing to reconvene the parliament – in the middle of an election – if the House had to impeach the judge on recommendation from the CAJ. But after Labour's election on 10 March, it only met six times through- out the rest of 2013. On 9 May 2013, Farrugia Sacco asked the CAJ to refer Gonzi's impeachment motion to the Speaker of the House, to see whether the motion was still valid given that he was no longer an MP in the new legislature. On 17 June 2013, parliamentary sec- retary for justice Owen Bonnici told the CAJ that he could ask the Speaker to decide whether the motion was still valid; but the CAJ decided it would not stop hearing the case unless the Speaker revokes its mandate. Seven more months passed before the CAJ presented its recommen- dation to the Speaker on 3 Febru- ary 2014 to have Farrugia Sacco impeached. Again, the judge asked the Speaker to consider that the im- peachment motion was now invalid, since parliamentary motions cannot be carried over to a new legislature. Gonzi himself, the proponent, was no longer MP. When the Speaker finally spiked the "dead" motion, Joseph Muscat filed a second impeachment motion. Now the CAJ would have to restart its deliberations. The judge would have hoped that the hearings would be far from over when he retires in August. Silvio Camilleri has refused to take the CAJ into a second round of hear- ings, telling the Speaker – in a letter signed, this time, by President George Abela – that the original decision was "definite". Farrugia Sacco wrote to the Speaker last week, complaining that no meet- ing was held by the CAJ to give him the opportunity to make his own rep- resentation on the new impeachment motion. He insists that the CAJ's first decision is dead, much as the original impeachment motion was, and so it cannot be "reconfirmed". Now Labour has turned down a request by the Opposition made last week for an urgent meeting of the House Business Committee to have MPs set a date for the impeachment hearing in the House. Labour MPs will meet tomorrow (Monday) to take a final decision. "The matter has been pending since 2007. It took the Nationalist govern- ments five years to act. When it finally took action, it did so at the end of its legislature before parliament dis- solved ahead of the general elections," the government said in a statement. The PN, on its part, says the Farru- gia Sacco case has negatively affected the public's trust in the judiciary. "Parliament must immediately dis- cuss the matter, pronounce itself on the matter and take a final decision," the PN said, calling on Muscat not to hinder the impeachment process. News Blue versus red togas? Not exactly, but… Having first resisted calls to resign his MOC post back in 2007, Lino Farrugia Sacco's fate may be inevitable but his impeachment is a test case for politicians on both sides of the House As far back in May 2013, Lino Farrugia Sacco (far left) asked the CAJ to ask the Speaker of the House to confirm whether his impeachment motion was still valid given that Lawrence Gonzi had resigned from the House. Chief Justice Silvio Camilleri (far right) did not entertain his request, and now will not take the CAJ into a new round of hearings on the impeachment motion