Court to decide on whether to try Vince Farrugia for perjury by March

A court will decide on whether it will order the police to prosecute former director-general of the GRTU Vince Farrugia for perjury after challenge proceedings were filed against the Commissioner of Police.

The proceedings asked him to investigate Farrugia for perjury with respect to an incident that happened on the 11 March, 2010, when Sandro Chetcuti allegedly assaulted Farrugia during a meeting.

Sandro Chetcuti, Chairman of the Malta Developers Association, had undergone criminal proceedings in 2013, and was acquitted of charges for the attempted murder and grievous bodily harm of Farrugia, who was then 65.

However, Chetcuti was sentenced to one month 's imprisonment suspended for a year after he was found guilty of causing slight injuries to Farrugia, and of harassing and threatening him.

Last year, Chetcuti filed challenge proceedings, claiming that even though there was clear “prima facie” evidence to implicate Vince Farrugia over perjury charges, the police commissioner had yet to arraign or even investigate the former GRTU director. He requested that the Commissioner charge Farrugia with perjury, suborning of witnesses to give false evidence, and fabrication of evidence.

Today, the court heard witness Sylvia Gauci, an ex-member of the GRTU council, who had testified in the proceedings against Sandro Chetcuti as a police witness. She explained that during her cross-examination in those proceedings, she had had a change of heart, retracting her initial statement.

In that initial statement, she had claimed to have seen Chetcuti hitting Farrugia and slamming his head on the floor.

Asked whether this was the result of external pressure, she said that the she had not been threatened but “had been told what to say.”  She told the court that Paul Abela, the office secretaries and herself had agreed on the version of events that would be given to the police, before making the report.

She told the court that the idea behind the statement was that “Sandro was to emerge as the bad guy who beat up Vince”. She said that she later heard that there had been a council meeting during which it was agreed to manipulate the story as payback. She confirmed that this was the meeting where the block vote against Sandro Chetcuti took place.

“When I left the room with Vince Farrugia and Sandro Chetcuti because I had left my mobile there, I heard a commotion coming from behind the closed door," she said.

“I heard cries of pain, then someone opened the door and went in and I saw Vince on the floor and Sandro standing opposite him some five metres away”. She said that she had not seen any exchange of blows.

The witness repeatedly denied speaking with Chetcuti or receiving any coaching on how to testify. Asked by the court, she said that Farrugia had sent her SMS messages about the incident. The SMSs were urging her to stick to her first version, but she felt compelled by her conscience to change her story.

Former Assistant Commissioner of the Criminal Investigation Department Emmanuel Cassar, who is also Chetcuti‘s father in law, was called to the witness stand. He was shown copies of SMS that had been exhibited in court.

He recognized them as extracts of messages exhibited an extract from the 1000 or so SMS recovered from Farrugia’s mobile phone.

Lawyer Edward Gatt explained to the court out that the Gauci, the first witness, is “the only one who made the retraction because she is the only one who doesn’t still work there and doesn’t depend on the GRTU for a paycheque”.

He told the court that Farrugia had systematically manoeuvred against and placed obstacles in the path of those trying to expose the truth. He read out to the court extracts of the SMS exchanges to and from Farrugia, which appeared to indicate an attempt on his part to control witness testimony.

“There is no doubt that a prima facie level of proof exists here," said Gatt, criticising Farrugia’s attempts to intimidate and manipulate witnesses and evidence as filthy, saying that he wanted to give a message - “there is a perception outside these walls that you can come to court, tell a fairytale and get what you want... Whoever attempts to make a mockery of justice deserves to face justice.”

Gatt highlighted the fact that Magistrate Edwina Grima, who heard the case against Chetcuti, ordered the Commissioner of Police to investigate and arraign Farrugia.

Magistrate Aaron Bugeja said that he wished to make it very clear that these were not appeal proceedings, nor was it a sentence and that challenge proceedings have a different outcome and a different burden of proof to other two.

“I am not going to re-examine the evidence. The court may choose to take proceedings on the basis on prima facie evidence, it is not a sentence but a decree that is given only on the face of the record. The proceedings may fail when they are brought before a magistrate as there may not be proof beyond reasonable doubt”.

The magistrate has given himself till 25 March to issue a decree on whether there is sufficient evidence to merit proceedings against Farrugia.