2002 drugs trafficking case ends in acquittal 20 years later after statement ruled inadmissible

A court has acquitted a man of drug trafficking charges dating back to 2002, after declaring the only piece of evidence against him - his unassisted statement to police – inadmissible.

In 2002, aged just 17 the accused from Qormi had been charged with dealing heroin, as well as possession of heroin and cannabis in a place where youths gathered.

The investigating police inspector had testified soon after the arrest, that the man had released a statement to the police, which he had later confirmed on oath in court. The court noted that the acts of the case showed that this statement had taken place without the accused being offered a chance to consult with a lawyer beforehand or during his deposition. This was due to the fact that the rights to legal advice before and during interrogation had not yet been introduced in the Maltese legal system.

In 2020, the man’s defence lawyer, David Bonello, had requested the court expunge the accused’s statement from the acts of the case, citing numerous judgments by the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court and the Criminal Court which had established that this practice breached the rights of the accused.

Noting that the statement released was incriminating with regards to the accused, the magistrate ruled that “in this case, it is evidence that the failure to give the accused the right to obtain legal advice before and during his interrogation, as well as during his testimony before the inquiring magistrate was not a failure which had left no prejudice against him.”

Highlighting the fact that the accused had been just 17 at the time of his interrogation, the court also noted that accused’s statement was the only piece of evidence against him. “The court therefore feels that in the circumstances, it would be wiser to follow in the footsteps of the Constitutional Court…and disregard the content of the statement…as inadmissible.” The same applied to his testimony before the inquiring magistrate, said the court.

Magistrate Natasha Galea Sciberras, who had inherited the case from another magistrate, noting that there was no further evidence against the man, ruled that the charges were not proven and acquitted him. The court imposed a ban on the publication of the name of the accused man as he had been a minor at the time of his arrest.