Judge to rule behind closed doors on Muka's fair trial complaint

A judge has heard Daniel Muka’s claims of a fair trial breach and will decide on the case behind closed doors.

The case concerns Muka’s change in lawyers and what he says was an inadequate amount of time for his new lawyer to prepare for the trial.

Lawyer Mario Mifsud replaced previous legal aid counsel Josette Sultana after Muka requested different representation, citing issues of trust and financial constraints.

Although Muka had previously refused legal aid, Mifsud explained that his client had difficulties securing private counsel, and eventually reached out to him on Thursday 12 June to represent him. After considering the request, Mifsud agreed to take on the case on Friday—just three days before the trial began.

On Monday, Mifsud filed a request for a short adjournment to allow more time to study the case files and build a proper defence. That request was rejected within minutes. Despite this, Mifsud still appeared for the start of the jury, where he reiterated the need for more time. Again, the request was denied.

The next morning, he repeated his request in court while informing the judge that a constitutional case had been filed. This second plea was also refused. In response, Mifsud formally withdrew from the trial, stating that he could not properly represent Muka without adequate preparation.

Mifsud told the court that Muka had consistently expressed concern over the disadvantages of being represented by state-appointed lawyers, and had repeatedly requested a private lawyer. He stressed that regardless of what Muka may have done, he was still entitled to a fair hearing, which includes a strong prosecution but also a proper and competent defence.

He also noted that the situation left Muka without proper legal representation, as cross-examinations were not even being conducted.

Judge Henri Mizzi remarked that the only documents in his possession were two applications filed to date, and asked Mifsud to walk him through the timeline. Mifsud replied that Muka has been in detention for five years.

Nicholas Mifsud, who is also appearing for Muka, added that even the current legal aid lawyer assigned to the case was not prepared, evidenced by the absence of cross-examinations, let alone Mario Mifsud, who was brought in just days before the start of the jury.

The prosecution argued that the case had been scheduled for May 2023 but was postponed to October after Muka’s lawyers at the time stepped down. Despite this delay, Muka did not appoint new private counsel. Eventually, he was assigned a legal aid lawyer but tensions between the two led to another resignation shortly before the jury was set to begin.

The prosecution maintained that the accused had been legally represented at various stages, including shortly after being charged, and that the repeated changes in representation had complicated proceedings unnecessarily.

However, Mario Mifsud insisted that the current situation was unjust. “Just because someone believes the case is already lost, doesn’t mean we should rush through a sitting in 15 minutes. We don’t even handle traffic cases in a quarter of an hour.”

At the end of the sitting, the court declared that it will deliver its decision behind closed doors.