Court declares 1994 Marsaskala robbery case time-barred, accused acquitted

Criminal proceedings dating back more than three decades are time-barred, a court has decreed, acquitting a man of all charges after finding that the applicable prescriptive periods had long expired.

Charles Cutajar, aged 31 at the time of the alleged offences. was charged in connection with events that allegedly took place during the night between 14 and 15 September 1994.

Cutajar was accused of committing  aggravated theft from a restaurant in Marsaskala, and was said to be aggravated by violence, time, means and value, exceeding Lm1,000, around €2,300 today. He was also charged with causing damage to movable or immovable property, issuing verbal threats against public service officials while they were carrying out their duties, breaching the conditions of a suspended sentence imposed in June 1991, and reoffending as a recidivist.

The Attorney General had referred the case for trial in December 1996, indicating that the accused could be found guilty under various provisions of the Criminal Code and subsidiary legislation.

Cutajar had declared that he raised no objection to the case being dealt with under summary procedure.

The court noted that the proceedings had remained dormant for long periods. In October 2011, the case was never adjourned, due to the absence of the parties. It was later reappointed ex officio for hearing in September 2025.

At that stage, the defence raised a preliminary plea of prescription, arguing that all charges were statute-barred due to the excessive lapse of time without valid procedural notifications being served on the accused.

The court limited its decision strictly to the issue of prescription. It observed that, under the law in force in 1994, the most serious charge — aggravated theft — carried a maximum penalty of five years’ imprisonment, meaning that the applicable prescriptive period was ten years. The remaining charges were subject to even shorter prescriptive terms.

The court rejected the prosecution’s argument that prescription had been suspended by legislative amendments introduced in 2002, which provide that prescription is suspended from the notification of charges until final judgment. The court ruled that this amendment could not be applied retroactively to offences allegedly committed in 1994, as doing so would be less favourable to the accused.

The court further found that the last valid notification of a procedural act to Cutajar had occurred on 17 October 2005. No further written notifications were served on him for over 19 years.

Given that more than the maximum prescriptive periods had elapsed without lawful interruption, the court upheld the defence’s plea, and therefore declared that the criminal action in respect of all charges had been extinguished by prescription.

Charles Cutajar was acquitted of all charges brought against him.

Magistrate Marse-Ann Farrugia presided over the hearing.

The prosecution was led by Superintendent Frankie Sammut and Inspector Kurt Farrugia, while defence lawyers Arthur Azzopardi and Jacob Magri represented the accused.