Labour MEP Alex Agius Saliba and the president of the Socialists and Democrats (S&D) Group of the European Parliament have defended the government’s magisterial inquiry reform bill in a letter to European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen.
In a statement on Thursday, PL said the letter co-signed by Agius Saliba and S&D president Iratxe García Pérez had been sent to “clarify misleading prejudices being spread by the Nationalist Party” about the reform.
“These inaccuracies and misconceptions are being echoed by the European People’s Party (EPP), a centre-right group in the European Parliament, which has described the reform as a ‘major step backwards’,” the statement read.
Last month, the government presented a bill to dramatically change the way magisterial inquiries can be requested by citizens including forcing members of the public to first file a police report six months before petitioning a magistrate.
In a letter to von der Leyen a couple of weeks later, the EPP had said the bill would “severely curtail” the rights of citizens and warned that, if adopted, it would constitute a “significant retrograde step” in rule of law in Malta.
Defending the reforms, however, Thursday’s letter noted the changes were based on recommendations from a 2018 Venice Commission – a European advisory council on constitutional law – report, recommending magisterial inquiries be “done away with” and instead carried out by the prosecution service.
A similar recommendations had been made in 2013 by a commission led by a former judge of the European Court of Human Rights, it said.
“One of the most significant aspects of the reform is the introduction of clearer and more structured parameters for initiating inquiries by private parties,” the letter read, noting that under the current system people could request investigations “without an obligation to bring forward substantive proof”.
The proposed bill, meanwhile, says that only evidence that is admissible in court can be used to request an inquiry, while giving magistrates a two-year deadline to complete their work and imposing new rules on how court experts are appointed and managed.
"The Maltese government seeks to ensure that inquiries are based on substantive evidence rather than speculative or merely vextatious claims... to prevent the misuse of inquiries for character assassination persecution purposes”, the letter read.
It stressed that claims high-profile corruption cases had been initiatied solely by civil society did not take into account the "significant institutional advancements Malta has made in combatting corruption."
The PL commented the reform would ensure citizens “refrain from making... frivolous claims”, adding the changes brought Malta into line with other EU countries.
Labour noted that should the police – who it said were “best equipped” to conduct investigations – not take action within six months, citizens “retain the right” to refer the case to the courts.
Agius Saliba and García Pérez urged von der Leyen to “assess the reforms in their entirety” and within the context of similar reforms across Europe.
The proposed reforms have drawn large protests and been criticised as harmful to the rule of law by two former chief justices, with nine civil society organisations calling on the government to publish a White Paper on the reforms before passing the bill into law.
Rejecting calls for public consultation on the matter, Justice Minister Jonathan Attard told journalists Saturday that the government had “enough knowledge” to proceed.