Sadness, relief as ‘Justicegate’ finally draws to a close
Raphael Vassallo
Karl Stagno Navarra In a crowded hall of the Criminal Court in Valletta, Mr Justice Giannini Caruana Demajo yesterday ended years of speculation and uncertainty regarding the fate of Noel Arrigo by finding the former Chief Justice guilty on three separate counts: bribery, trading in influence and revealing official secrets.
Sentencing is expected tomorrow, with the law stipulating a prison term of anywhere between six and eight years.
Noel Arrigo was arrested in 2002 following a police investigation into allegations that a convicted drug trafficker, Mario Camilleri aka L-Imniehru, had approached through an intermediary two of the three judges on the Criminal Court of Appeal – Patrick Vella and the former Chief Justice Arrigo, to have his prison sentenced reduced by four years on appeal.
Vella pleaded guilty to the charge of bribery and has already served his two-year sentence in full. Arrigo on other hand entered a plea of not guilty, with his defence counsel, led by Dr Joseph Giglio, arguing that the evidence presented against Arrigo did not conclusively prove that the former judge had accepted a bribe. However, in delivering a guilty verdict, Caruana Demajo upheld the prosecution’s thesis that Arrigo had behaved in a manner unbecoming of the most senior representative of the judiciary – by allowing himself to be so easily approached by persons with ulterior motives; and above all by failing to report the matter to the President of the Republic, as required to by law, when he was approached with a clear offer of money.
Commenting on yesterday’s verdict, former President and Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami – who had first broken the news of Arrigo’s arrest seven years ago – said that he had been “absolutely shocked and flabbergasted” when he came to know about what had happened in 2002.
“The press conference I had called that day in August clearly displayed my shock,” Fenech Adami added, while stressing that his dismay was also shared by the people as something of the sort should have never happened, “but it saddened us all to know that it had happened, and this was confirmed by the Courts that have found the former Chief Justice guilty of corruption.”
On his part, Chamber of Advocates president Andrew Borg Cardona commented that the legal profession in general was torn between conflicting emotions of sadness and relief at yesterday’s long-awaited outcome.
“The initial reaction (among lawyers in general) is one of relief that the ordeal is finally over,” he said. “We have all been following proceedings with extreme interest, and I think it’s safe to say we all wanted it to get behind us as quickly as possible.”
Borg Cardona acknowledges that the case posed unique problems to lawyers, because of the close relations that inevitably existed between the legal profession and a man who had occupied the posts of practising lawyer, judge and Chief Justice in his career.
“We have all had conflicting feelings about the case. Many of us knew the accused personally, as let’s face it: he was not exactly a recluse. It was therefore difficult for all concerned.... on a human level for those who knew the accused or had worked closely with him, and on a legal level because of the seriousness of the case.”
Commenting on the wider implications of yesterday’s verdict, Borg Cardona reiterated his position, expressed in his annual address to the judiciary earlier this year, in favour of a strengthening of the Commission for the Administration of Justice.
“On one level the judiciary as an institution deserves the general public’s respect,” he said. “But at the same time respect also has to be earned, and to this end there has to be a clear-cut system which also holds the judiciary to account. Now would be a good time to address the structures regulating judicial responsibility in the country. The Commission for the Administration of Justice needs to be further strengthened, from an institution which is limited to issuing warnings which (let’s face it) can easily be ignored...”
Borg Cardona points out that there is “nothing in between” the two opposite extremes: on the one hand, a largely unenforceable verbal or written warning issued by the Commission for the Administration of Justice ; and on the other, the lengthy and cumbersome Parliamentary procedures for impeachment.
“Recent history suggests that the second option tends to be inconclusive, as party politics has a habit of taking over,” Borg Cardona said.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
