President George Abela may have unintentionally stirred a hornet’s nest with his recent comments regarding the ongoing case against three clergymen from the St Joseph Home for Boys in Santa Venera, accused of molesting 11 boys entrusted to their care in the 1980s.
In a meeting with the alleged victims of this child abuse scandal – now all in their 30s – President Abela promised to ‘verify’ the reasons for an apparent delay in the proceedings, which have been ongoing since 2003.
“Justice delayed is justice denied,” Dr Abela was reported as having told the men in the course of their hour-long meeting, held at the Palace in Valletta on Saturday.
On the face of things, there can be little doubt that the President is correct in his analysis of the situation. Seven years is indeed a long time to wait for the mills of justice to grind to a conclusion, and it is in the interest of all concerned that the issue of undue prolongation of court cases is addressed as a matter of urgency.
But at the same time, it must be said that the President is being somewhat selective when it comes to personal involvement in such cases. Comparisons are admittedly odious, especially when it comes to matters as sensitive as the one under the spotlight in this instance. But it must also be pointed out that the seven-year delay at hand, while no doubt a serious issue in its own right, simply pales to insignificance compared to other, less publicised court cases – some of which have dragged on for much, much longer periods of time, without ever coming to any form of closure.
Examples are in over-abundant supply, but one need look no further than the case filed by the shareholders of the National Bank of Malta, now in its 31st year after constant deferrals since the distant 1970s. This case alone has technically been in session for more than four times as long as the child abuse trial, which the President himself cites as an example of ‘justice delayed’... and to all outward appearances, it may conceivably drag on for several more years to come.
Yet another recent case to have made headlines on account of undue delay in the administration of justice was that of former prison warder Anthony Mifsud: who had to wait 27 years for the closure of his case against government, after having been framed (not to mention imprisoned and tortured) over the escape of Louis Bartolo from Kordin prison in 1982.
Meanwhile there are countless other, less prominent cases, which have taken comparable lengths of time without seeming to ever reach any form of closure. Families embroiled in compensation cases over requisition of property, among sveral other issues, often have veritable horror stories to tell: stories of proceedings condemned to an eternity in court, as their case is time and again deferred... sometimes with frivolous justifications, or no justification at all.
As one online commentator cynically put it (specifically in reaction to news of the President’s involvement in the child abuse case): “I know people who have been waiting more than 12 years for a conclusion of their court cases which are deferred on the flimsiest of reasons, with no end in sight. A friend of mine is one of them, having started a court case 12 years ago when he was still in his prime, free from chronic disease and full of energy, and who is [now] nearing 70 and lacking the strength and stamina needed to ensure justice is carried out...”
Viewed from the perspective of persons caught up in such ordeals, the President’s declared commitment to look into a seven-year delay in only one case can only come across as being selective in the extreme. These people are perhaps owed an explanation for the President’s interest in only one case of ‘justice delayed’, when there appear to be so many other examples to choose from.
Add to this the undeniable fact that the case in question had already risen to worldwide prominence – if nothing else, because of the fact that Pope Benedict XVI met the same alleged victims only the previous week – and one is left with the uncomfortable impression that the President’s interest in the matter may well have been considerably less, had the case in question not been pole-vaulted into the media spotlight by the Papal visit.
None the less, it is a positive development that the President, partly in his role as chairman of the Commission for the Administration of Justice, has now committed himself to addressing the issue of undue delay in court cases. Let us hope therefore that the results of this commitment do not take quite as long to see the light of day, as some of the cases alluded to above.
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.
