A lawyer representing Chinese textile company Leisure Clothing yesterday told a court the firm was willing to pay outstanding wages owed to workers, as long as these were uncontested by the company.

Lawyer Pio Valletta was reacting to a request made by presiding Magistrate Carol Peralta who spent almost five hours listening to the testimony of a former employee after she spent 20 days working at the Bulebel plant but never got paid for it.

Dr Valletta said the company was prepared to pay the amounts on which there was no contestation and added the money could be deposited in court.

However, this brought an angry reaction from the magistrate, who appealed for “some humanity”.

The offer brought an angry reaction from the magistrate, who appealed for some humanity

“Let us be human,” the magistrate told the lawyer, pointing out that the Vietnamese were living in Malta and needed the money to sustain themselves.

During yesterday’s sitting, Nguem Van Giam gave a blow-by-blow account of what led him to come to Malta to work for Leisure Clothing, what he was promised and what he actually found.

He was testifying in the compilation of evidence against company managing director Bin Han, 46, of San Ġwann and marketing director Jia Liu, 31, of Birżebbuġa, who are charged with human trafficking and the exploitation of Chinese and Vietnamese workers at Leisure Clothing. The two are pleading not guilty.

The worker explained how he came to Malta through a Vietnamese agency, Vihatico, and was promised a wage of €685 a month. He said he paid the agency a total of 70 million Vietnamese dong (around €1,000) as a deposit for the “highly paid” job.

He said he met an agency representative who told him he could earn much more than the amount written in the sample contract she gave him to take home and read.

However, when he was chosen and went back to the agency, the contract he was asked to sign was different to the one he had been shown. The woman told him the wage was lower so he could pay less tax and reassured him that the basic wage was €685 and that the contract was in line with the laws of Malta.

“I considered not signing but since I had already paid them, I felt I had no choice,” he said.

During the interview, he said he was not allowed to ask any questions or seek clarifications.

When he came to Malta, he found accommodation that was substandard and “dirty” and food that lacked vitamins.

He said the workers were fed mostly cabbage, without fish or meat, and that six rolls of toilet paper and two bottles of water were not enough for an entire month. Breakfast consisted only of a steamed bun.

This brought an angry reaction from defence counsel Edward Gatt, who said he could have gone to buy water and toilet paper “like everyone else in the world”.

Mr Nguem said that when he complained, Mr Bin told him to pack his bags so he could be sent back to Vietnam as his work was not up to standard.

When Mr Nguem asked him for the money he was owed and his deposit back, Mr Bin refused, saying the company was paying for his flight to Vietnam, so there was no reason for him to ask for more money.

The case continues.

Police Inspector Joseph Busuttil prosecuted. Lawyers Edward Gatt and Pio Valletta are appearing for the defendants. Lawyers Katrine Camilleri and Karl Briffa are appearing parte civile for the Vietnamese workers.