Wrong interpretation of law? - Joe Brincat

Tonio Borg expressed an opinion about the decision delivered by the Criminal Court, on the request for an enquiry by Simon Busuttil. It is unfortunate that we have to discuss such a legal problem against the background of politics and politicians.

I definitely agree with Borg that reasoned and respectful discussion about court judgments is not only legitimate but actually presumed to be in the interests of justice. It is for this reason that there is publicity of procedures and judgments.

To avoid any suspicion of political bias in this opinion, I shall refrain from discussing the particular decision. But we are fully entitled to examine the law, even from a historical perspective, to arrive at the precise interpretation.

Borg is correct when he says that the function is bestowed on a “magistrate” and not on “a court”.  The magistrate is the guarantor of the truth of his observations on material evidence, which has to be preserved. This remains the essential functions of the enquiring magistrate.

He is not an investigative magistrate, on the model of the Italian Pubblico Ministero, who conducts his own investigations and delves into all aspects of a criminal prospective...