[WATCH] | Afriqiyah hijackers: Air traffic controller describes chilling phone call from Libyan counterpart

Afriqiyah hijackers exiting the court in Valletta

The two hijackers of the Afriqiyah Airways A320 that was flown to Malta on 23 December have appeared in court this morning as the compilation of evidence against them is currently underway.

Police officers, carrying CZ Scorpion sub machine guns and pistols, wearing body armour and helmets patrolled the corridors of the court building as the accused, Moussa Shaha Soko, 27, and Ali Ahmed Saleh, 28, both of Sebha, Libya, appeared before magistrate Anthony Vella.

The flight had been on an internal flight from Sebha to Tripoli when it was diverted by the two hijackers who are understood to have threatened to blow up the plane. They were later found to have used imitation firearms.

Photos by James Bianchi

Photos by James Bianchi

Photos by James Bianchi

Photos by James Bianchi

Photos by James Bianchi

All 111 passengers - 82 men, 28 women and an infant - and six crew members who were onboard the aircraft were released unharmed.

The accused, reportedly Muammar Gaddafi loyalists, are charged with terrorism-related offences as well as with being in possession of imitation weapons, using violence against a person on board the flight, holding people against their will, threatening the passengers, endangering the safety of the aircraft, making threats of violence, and attempting to cause financial or economic instability for a government or international institution.

If found guilty, the men face a possible maximum term of life imprisonment. 

Witnesses testify

Police Inspector Omar Zammit from the police anti-terrorism section said that on the day of the hijacking, they had been informed by the control tower about a hijacked plane that wanted to land in Malta. At around 11:30, the flight was directed to land on runway 5. AFM commander Bdr Jeffrey Curmi and other officers went to the control room to direct the operation, he said.

Negotiations led to the release of the passengers, the witness said, adding that Moussa Shaha, upon leaving the aircraft, was seen throwing away a weapon, that was later found to be a replica.

During the flight, the hijackers handed a letter to the chief officer demanding it land in Rome or the place would be blown up. The crew eventually succeeded in convincing the hijackers to divert to Malta. On the mobile phone of one of the crew a photo of the hijackers was taken in the hope that it would help identify them to investigators.

A plan of the aircraft, together with pictures of guns, grenades and a cockpit were later found on one of the hijacker's mobile phone.

Inspector Zammit gave a timeline of the hijacking and subsequent crime scene investigations. 23 arrivals and 24 departing flights were delayed as a result of the hijack, the inspector said. The aircraft is still under armed guard, he confirmed.

Another witness, AFM representative Pasquale Fava testified that the AFM's role was to detain the hijackers, before delivering them into police custody.

Asked about the demeanour of the accused, the witness said they were unable to understand the soldiers and could only communicate through signs.

Air traffic control representative Bernard Galea was next on the stand, recalling how the chilling news of the incident was received in a call from Libyan air traffic control. On 23 December, he had received a call from a Libyan ATC representative giving an estimated time for the entry of an aircraft into Maltese airspace. “After giving me the details of the flight and its intended destination, he told me 'this is a hijack'.”

An Afriquiyah Airways Malta-based IT manager and spokesman has also testified, telling the court that on 23 December, he had noticed a lot of missed calls from Libya on his mobile phone. When he answered the phone at 11am, a colleague from the IT department in Libya had told him that he had seen news of a hijack on Facebook and asked whether it was true. He had informed the airline's chairman and had started piecing together the disparate threads of information from various sources in an effort to understand what was happening. He was dispatched to Malta International Airport by the chairman.

The airline's Tripoli-based flight operations manager was also summoned to the stand this morning. Answering a question from the court, he said his role was to manage the flight schedules and oversee crew training. “On the day, I was called up by the duty operations officer. 'One of our flights has been hijacked,' he told me. That was around 11:30am Libyan time,” he recalled.

He had rushed to Mitiga airport in Tripoli and activated the emergency response room. Different department representatives would meet here to deal with “abnormal situations.”

Cross-examined by defence lawyer Joe Ellis, he said that to the best of his knowledge none of the passengers had filed any claims against the airline or requested any special assisted. “I cannot tell you for sure. This is handled by a different department.”

He hailed the crew's efforts from the witness stand. “Their job was to bring the passengers back unharmed...this is the result of intensive training. This is something to be proud of.”

Defence argues against Attorney General’s presence

Saleh was represented in this sitting by lawyer Julian Farrugia, filling in for lawyer Patrick Valentino, who is unwell. Farrugia and Valentino work for the same law firm as PN MP Jason Azzopardi, who however, does not appear to be directly involved in this case. Proceedings had to be suspended until the arrival of Shaha's legal aid lawyer, Ellis, who was appointed to him as counsel.

Arriving around an hour later, Ellis protested against the presence of deputy Attorney General Philip Galea Farrugia, who is assisting the prosecution, arguing that the AG isn't supposed to be involved in this stage of proceedings.

The magistrate said he saw nothing stopping the AG from being present and advising the prosecution. “An investigating officer actually should not be a prosecutor,” he pointed out. Ellis argued that the AG had a conflict of interest. “When AG is assisting the prosecution, the possibility that it decides not to proceed further is reduced because he has a hand in it...The AG has a quasi-judicial role in deciding whether to issue a Bill of indictment...the law doesn't contemplate his presence in this stage. The role is not to assist the prosecution, but to decide on whether to issue the bill of indictment."

A legal issue arose when the defence argued that the accused men had a right not to testify, but then the prosecution would exhibit the statement they had released to the police. This was a indirect way of prejudicing the defendants' rights, Ellis said.

The $98 million dollar Airbus A320 is still in the custody of the Maltese authorities. This morning, lawyer Daniel Buttigieg, representing the airline, requested that the court order the aircraft's release as the necessary data had been collected. The request could not be upheld until the court-appointed expert's report was handed in, he was told, however. This is understood to be taking place tomorrow.

The case continues on 19 January.