Court denies bail to Libyan boxer Mohamed Elmushraty ‘Lilu King’

Updated at 7:30pm with bail decision 

A judge has denied after hearing submissions on a bail application filed by flamboyant Libyan boxer Mohamed Elmushraty, who goes by the nickname “Lilu King.”

Elmushraty has been held in preventive custody ever since his arrest in May, and is facing charges of money laundering, tax evasion and participation in organised crime.

Mr. Justice Aaron Bugeja heard submissions on Thursday, after Elmushraty’s lawyers, Franco Debono, Marion Camilleri and Francesca Zarb filed a bail request before the Criminal Court.

Prosecuting lawyer Antoine Agius Bonnici, from the Office of the Attorney General, objected to bail, as the complex investigation was still ongoing, a number of witnesses were yet to testify and due to the fear of the defendant absconding.

“The investigation is not yet over,” he said. “Other suspects have been arrested and charged, but there are others who have not.” The other suspects, identified in court only by codenames Alpha 1, Alpha 2 and so forth had been mentioned during the compilation of evidence.

A police constable who had been part of the team carrying out surveillance on Elmushraty and another officer had both mentioned these suspects in their testimonies, said Agius Bonnici, adding that one of the suspects in question had recently been arrested and had provided police with further information.

“Organised crime is not an easy crime to prove. There are layers of people giving orders, to keep the identity of the person at the top hidden. If bail is granted, there is a risk of him tampering with evidence,” the prosecutor said, pointing out that witnesses had already been approached in an attempt to suborn them and criminal proceedings relating to this are currently underway.

He denied the assertion that no evidence had been exhibited - “investigations into organised crime take time,” he insisted, telling the court that the authorities in Libya were currently working with their Maltese counterparts to share evidence about the organised crime group. The prosecutor cited European Court judgments which found no breach of a suspect’s rights after a year of being detained under preventive arrest. “Here we only have 3 months.”

Elmushraty had strong contacts overseas and had also been granted bail before in other criminal proceedings but had breached his bail conditions and travelled abroad regardless, he added, saying that his trustworthiness was an issue.

Prosecution “straining” to produce evidence, claims defence.

Lawyer Franco Debono told the court that the prosecution was “straining itself” to produce evidence that it did not have, saying that in other, more serious, cases police bail had been granted during investigations before the suspect was arraigned.

“Three months is way too much to keep a person under arrest with the excuse of ongoing investigations,” said the lawyer, arguing that during the last sitting of the compilation of evidence, “we only heard people give testimony that is exculpatory for the accused.”

“We have three people, whose identities we still don’t know as yet, three months after the arraignment,” argued Debono.

“Many incidents have happened which are a little strange,” Debono went on. “During the arraignment, the court had urged the prosecution to produce its witnesses without delay…but I faced an uphill struggle to convince the magistrate presiding the compilation of evidence that this solicitation had to be followed.”

Debono described the case against Elmushraty as a “fishing expedition.” “What have we heard, in a nutshell? That the police spent three months surveilling him day in day out. They have not pressed charges relating to drug possession or conspiracy. He does not have ongoing drug-related proceedings. Neither does he have convictions relating to drugs. But in spite of this, they are still straining themselves to bring drugs into the equation.”

“Where is the evidence of organised crime?” asked the lawyer. “Thank you for following him around for three months because you did not find any evidence involving drugs.”

Debono referred to a sitting held on August 26 in which a witness testified that Elmushraty had nothing to do with a Mercedes G Wagon. “He said, in the clearest of terms, that the car in question was his and that the defendant had no connection with it. Maybe he would use it infrequently [at most].”

He asked if it was acceptable to still have unnamed witnesses, who hadn’t even been found, in an advanced stage of his client’s prosecution.

Additionally, the charge of organised crime still had to be proven, said the lawyer. “You need evidence. Are we saying that we now arraign first and investigate later?” Any lack of investigative resources was “not the fault nor the problem of the defendant,” he added.

Debono pointed to the prosecutions of Patrick Spiteri, Adrian Hillman, and Ryan Schembri, who were all brought to Malta from abroad on the strength of European Arrest Warrants, reminding the court that they had all been granted bail - in Hillman’s case, during his arraignment. “They are saying that he is not trustworthy, like Hillman, because he had travelled to Amsterdam and then came back.”

“Although he did not scrupulously follow his bail conditions because he went abroad, by returning to Malta he showed that he had no intention to abscond…He could have travelled onwards to anywhere in the world.”

“Tanto fumo e poco arrosto,” Debono argued. “As far as I know, showing off on social media is not a crime.”

During the last sitting of the compilation of evidence against Elmushraty, presiding Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech had criticised prosecutors over the dearth of evidence exhibited so far to support their claim of Elmushraty’s alleged involvement in money laundering the proceeds of organised crime and drug trafficking.

Prosecutors were still to identify several other suspects, who so far had been referred to in court as “Alpha 1,” Alpha 2” and so forth.

Defence to file request for recusal of compiling magistrate

Debono also announced that he will be requesting the recusal of magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech, who is presiding the compilation of evidence against Elmushraty “at the first opportunity.”

The lawyer said the magistrate had “made an observation which was completely incorrect, by saying that the Hawala money transfer system was illegal.”

Elmushraty claims that he received funds through the Hawala system.

Hawala is an informal value transfer system, popular in the Arab world and the Indian subcontinent, which is based on the performance and honour of a huge network of money brokers, called hawaladars. The system operates outside of, or parallel to, traditional banking, financial channels and remittance systems.  

“It was an observation, not only untimely and premature, but also incorrect. It is not true that Hawala is illegal…You have to distinguish between who is receiving and who is sending the money through this service,” Debono told the court on Thursday, saying that the issue merited the magistrate’s recusal as it meant the court was showing “a certain bias.”

“The court is there to provide justice - we can’t have a case based on what the defendant uploads on social media. In three months, what have we heard? Nothing about drugs. That a car belonged to someone else. Even the court expressed frustration about this.”

Debono said the prosecution was struggling because it did not have evidence to support the charges and much of the evidence it had exhibited was “not even admissible.”

“At this rate the compilation of evidence will never end. The next sitting of the compilation of evidence is on 11 October, two more months without hearing a single witness testify,” he said. “Is it fair? Is this justice within a reasonable time?”

The lawyer hinted at his intention to file a constitutional challenge to the legal impossibility of filing an appeal to decrees finding prima facie grounds for indictment.

Replying to the defence’s submissions, Agius Bonnici pointed out that Elmushraty does not currently hold a valid identification document and that his refugee status had been revoked, although an application for refugee status was pending.

Debono said this was untrue. “He had refugee status since 2018, because he would be tortured if he returned to Libya. The only thing that happened is that administratively, he did not go to renew it.” The lawyer said that there was no change in Elmushraty’s circumstances, and so his refugee status can be expected to be renewed.