Legal aid structure attacked in constitutional case
The constitutional application also claims the Attorney General’s discretion to decide how the applicant would be tried should be deemed unconstitutional.
5 February 2014, 12:00am
Chris Mangion
Chris Mangion
2 min read
John Udagha Omeh, who was imprisoned for 20 years and fined €70,000 over charges of trafficking cocaine, has filed a constitutional application claiming his rights were violated.
The applicant was assisted by legal aid.
He referred to the European Convention of Human Rights that states that the accused has the right to defend himself through legal assistance of his own choice, and should he not have sufficient means, this is to be given for free in the interest of justice.
However the current situation in Malta provides a restrictive pool of around ten legal aid lawyers who are assigned cases on roster basis. In the case of trials by jury only one legal aid lawyer is available.
Such a legal situation does not satisfy the criteria mentioned in the Convention, the constitutional application read, as it precludes the applicant from proper and adequate defence.
Omeh further challenges the fact he was not offered legal assistance at interrogation stage since Maltese Law at the time did not include such right. Prior constitutional cases have established that such lack of legal assistance is a violation of the accused’s rights.
The applicant submits that the discretion afforded to the Attorney General to decide whether he is to be tried by the Court of Magistrates or to be tried by a trial by jury also violates his rights.
The AG has a role of prosecutor with powers to decide how the accused should be tried and which punishment is applicable.
The constitutional application requested the court to declare that these issues violate Omeh’s rights to a fair and impartial hearing.
Furthermore, the order granting the AG the discretion to decide how the applicant would be tried should be deemed unconstitutional and the judgment delivered by the Court of Criminal appeal on 14 June 2012 declared null and void.
On 13 January 2010 with a verdict of seven votes against two, Omeh was convicted of drug trafficking. Two years later on 14 June 2012, a Court of Appeal confirmed the judgment.
Lawyers Franco Debono and Michaela Spiteri signed the constitutional application.
Chris Mangion is MaltaToday’s photojournalist, joining the newspaper in 2013.
In 1995...
•
So not only do they come to killo our youths but even after affording them a lawyer they still complain because they want to choose one at our expense. The Court should reject this claim and if any foreign drug dealer/trafficker/smuggler wants a lawyer he must be made to pay for his lawyer himself.
•
So being poor in the EU is against human rights? Or is this just a right for poor illegal immigrants, and other poor immigrants from outside the EU but not for the 'European' and Maltese poor?
I like the idea that poverty goes against human rights for eventually we will go back to Marx's maxim'Ahdem kemm tiflah u hu kemm tehtieg' and this will redistribute wealth in a just manner?
