Court clears MaltaToday Online Editor of contempt over published Fenech interrogation audio

MaltaToday Online Editor Karl Azzopardi was acquitted on Friday of contempt of court charges related to the alleged publication of voice recordings concerning the police interrogation of Yorgen Fenech.

The case, initiated by the Director of Courts and Criminal Tribunals, hinged on two decrees issued by the Examining Magistrate in early 2020 during the compilation of evidence against Yorgen Fenech.

In January 2020, the magistrate ordered that copies of documents, including police interrogation recordings and transcriptions, be given to the defence, while strictly ordering they not be published or made available to third parties. In February 2020, the court reiterated this order and explicitly clarified that its breach would constitute contempt of court.

Despite these orders, the court noted in August 2020 that publications had appeared on the electronic platform reddit.com (posted anonymously), as well as on Maltese news portals and social media.

These publications included parts of voice recordings derived from the proceedings. The

court considered a “manifest breach and barefaced breach to court orders” and ordered that steps be taken against those responsible.

Following these publications, and specifically after the court presented a request referring to voice recordings published on maltatoday.com at the end of August 2020, the director was ordered to initiate contempt proceedings against Karl Azzopardi.

The director sought to fine Azzopardi between €232.94 and €2,329.37 or impose a period of detention.

In response, Azzopardi raised several exceptions. He argued the publication ban related to Article 409 of the Criminal Code applies only to process documents originating from the court registry, and since he was not a party to the compilation proceedings, he was not officially bound by the prohibition orders.

Crucially, his defence maintained his alleged conduct was based exclusively on a short audio recording found on a public electronic site and that he had not obtained the material from the official court compilation documents. He further invoked the principle nulla poena sine lege (no penalty without law), insisting prosecuting an individual who was not part of the compilation process for publishing documented evidence was legally unfounded.

In its analysis, the court, presided over by Magistrate Marsanne Farrugia, acknowledged that contempt proceedings, although regulated by the Civil Code, are criminal in nature.

However, the Magistrate concluded that the director had failed to discharge the burden of proof, particularly regarding the proper application of the law.

The key legal obstacle lay in Article 517(1) of the Criminal Code, which governs publication bans on information gathered during investigations. The court held this provision must be followed meticulously for a ban to legally bind those handling such information.

Magistrate Marsanne Farrugia accepted Azzopardi’s preliminary objection, finding that the prohibition orders issued in January and February 2020 were not published with the formality prescribed by the Criminal Code.

Because this required formality was missing, and because the court accepted the defence argument the publication was based on audio already available on an electronic site, the director failed to prove that Azzopardi had deliberately flouted a legally enforceable prohibition.

The intentional element of contempt was therefore not established.

The court rejected the director’s requests and acquitted Karl Azzopardi.