Former police chief defends aggressor whose charges he tried to expunge

In a surreal turn of events, the former Commissioner of Police who tried to hinder charges being levied against a former client of his, is now defending Josmar Agius of the same charges of police assault.

Peter Paul Zammit, who was police chief for one year between 2013 and 2014 before being asked to step down, today informed a court that he would be joining the defence team of a man against whom he had ordered criminal charges to be dropped – after the court refused to allow Zammit to represent himself as an interested party in the proceedings.

Magistrate Saviour Demicoli was hearing evidence in the case against 44-year-old Josmar Agius from Marsaxlokk, who is charged with threatening and hindering police work at the Zabbar police station in 2013.

Earlier this year, Parliament was told that during his tenure as police commissioner, Zammit had ordered that no charges be pressed against Agius in relation to the incident.

Back in May, an inquiry tabled in parliament had found that Zammit had personally intervened to drop charges against his former client. Agius had been a client of Zammit’s, who practised as a legal procurator before joining the police force.

In May, Zammit made headlines when he appeared in the courtroom as Agius’s case was being heard, arguing that he had a valid juridical interest in the case and asking to be allowed to represent himself as parte civile.

The court acceded to the request, after which prosecuting inspector Robert Said Sarreo filed an application in the name of Police Commissioner Michael Cassar, requesting that the court rescind this decision.

Said Sarreo had insisted that Zammit should not be granted standing in this case. “He wants to be admitted because he had taken a decision. If we were to allow all the members of the police force who had taken some sort of decision in connection with this case, the courtroom would be packed,” he said.

The former police commissioner had not been present when the incident at the Zabbar police station took place, Said Sarreo said, pointing out that the court will not be examining Zammit’s decision not to charge Agius, but rather would be deciding on Agius’s guilt or otherwise.

Zammit countered, explaining that his interest in the case derived from the fact that it was borne of his administrative decision not to charge Agius. The correct legal route to challenge an administrative decision of the police commissioner would be to file challenge proceedings against the commissioner, after which the courts would decide whether or not the decision justified.

The legal procurator claimed that he wanted to be present because he wanted the truth to out, accusing the prosecution of committing a crime themselves by hindering him from doing so. The criminal case against him was instigated by media hype, which had blown the Zabbar police station incident out of proportion.

Agius’s lawyer, Labour MP Joe M. Sammut, observed that there seemed to be a legal battle between the police commissioner and his predecessor. He agreed that Zammit had legal standing in the proceedings.

But magistrate Demicoli disagreed, ruling that the case was not about Zammit’s decision not to press charges. “If legal procurator Zammit is objecting to any decision taken by the police commissioner, the court is not the right forum to contest it.”

The court reversed its earlier ruling and turned down Zammit’s request to be admitted as parte civile lawyer in the case.

As soon as the magistrate had delivered this decree, Zammit took to his feet once more, announcing that the would be joining Dr Sammut on Agius’s defence team.

The case continues in October.