Malta Today reported the decree given by Madame Justice Edwina Grima regarding a plea that had been filed by Yorgen Fenech’s lawyers about the publications of extracts from the chats of the same Yorgen Fenech by Mark Camilleri.
What struck me in Malta Today’s article is the following quote taken from Edwina Grima’s decree.
This is rather baffling. The judge is here accusing Yorgen Fenech of attempting to use exhibited material outside courts and that he has made allegations that the witnesses produced by the prosecution are not credible.
Honestly, I don’t know when Yorgen Fenech’s lawyers made such allegations outside court, even if, they have every legal right to speak up. Yorgen Fenech is kept in jail and has not yet been allowed to be heard by our courts.
Furthermore, to my knowledge, Yorgen Fenech’s advocates have never given press conferences and always used legal channels to lodge their complaints. Therefore, something is amiss here. Perhaps somebody will be kind enough to explain to me how was such a conclusion reached based on such a premise which appears to me as ‘abbuso di potere’.
Notwithstanding the above, what is even more distressing is that the judge based all this on ‘it appears’. In fact, she begins her statement by declaring “it appears”. The High Court is not the place to resort to euphemisms of any kind.
Since when do our judges base their judgements and arguments on such a fickle basis? Judges are meant to base their judgement on facts. If this is the spirit being adopted in this case of Yorgen Fenech then I fear that the only recourse eventually will be for this case to end before the Court of Human Rights.
There was a person who had served twice as a juror and wrote on Facebook that he based his judgement about the accused by looking at him during his first appearance in court!
The reader should be reminded that our courts have sent innocent people to the gallows ‘on appearances’. One such individual was a certain Rużar Mizzi, known as il-Lajs. He was hung after having been falsely accused by the then Crown Advocate (the precursor of the Advocate of the Republic). The person who defended him against these false accusations and a judgement that was based on appearance was a certain Manuel Dimech who today is being lauded as a hero. But because of this case, the freemasons, who were, and possibly still are, very powerful in our court circles, succeeded in finally exiling Dimech for exposing the dirty tricks used by the prosecutor to bring about the condemnation of an innocent man. Manuel Dimech admitted to all this in one of his articles published in Bandiera tal-Maltin.
It should be noted that Madame Justice Edwina Grima is going to preside over Yorgen Fenech’s jury. His lawyers have already objected but she has refused to recuse herself and is adamant to preside this case. Incidentally, this is going to be the second jury that Madame Justice will be presiding in connection with the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The first one had been that of Vince Muscat Il-Koħħu.