80 academics demand jury system review after Caruana Galizia, Cisse acquittals

A group of 80 academics called for an independent review of Malta’s jury system, warning that recent acquittals in cases linked to the murders of Daphne Caruana Galizia and Lassana Cisse shook public confidence in the justice system.

In an open letter addressed to Prime Minister Robert Abela, the academics expressed their “profound dismay and concern” over the verdicts, which they said raised serious questions about the effectiveness of Malta’s jury system.

In particular, the group raised concerns about the message such outcomes may send to society, especially minority communities, vulnerable individuals, journalists, and those who stand against discrimination, injustice, and abuses of power.

While stressing that they do not question judicial independence or the presumption of innocence, the signatories insisted that citizens have every right to scrutinise the effectiveness of the justice system.

They argued that, as a fundamental pillar of democracy, the judicial system should not be beyond scrutiny, critical examination, or reform, stressing that public confidence in justice cannot be taken for granted.

“A democratic society cannot afford to lose confidence in its justice system,” the letter read. “Justice must serve everyone, without distinction, discrimination or prejudice.”

The academics urged the authorities to take their concerns seriously and initiate an independent review without further delay.

An independent review of Malta’s jury system

The group proposed establishing an independent technical committee, comprising legal experts, academics, civil society representatives, and other relevant stakeholders, to carry out a comprehensive, evidence-based review of Malta’s jury system.

Such a review, they explained, should examine the system’s effectiveness, safeguards, procedures, transparency, and ability to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice.

It should also draw on international evidence, comparative judicial practices, and the experiences of other democratic countries.

The committee would then be tasked with presenting concrete recommendations for legislative, procedural, or institutional reforms aimed at strengthening the administration of justice and restoring public confidence in the judicial system.

“Our call is not an attack on judicial independence, nor an attempt to undermine the fundamental rights of accused persons. On the contrary, it reflects our commitment to a judicial system that is independent, fair, effective, accountable and worthy of the trust placed in it by the people it serves,” the academics concluded.