The committee that vets prospective members of the judiciary has rejected the application of veteran lawyer and l-Orizzont columnist Anna Mallia to become a judge in the Superior Courts.
The reason is not known as decisions by the Judicial Appointments Committee are kept secret.
However, sources close to the Justice Ministry said the committee did not take kindly to the fact that Dr Mallia continued to make public comments, even of a political nature, after she was appointed to chair a Small Claims Tribunal.
Last February, The Sunday Times of Malta had noted that Dr Mallia may be in breach of the judiciary’s code of ethics, which also binds adjudicators of the tribunals. They are precluded from expressing opinions in public through any form of mass media including newspapers and TV.
Tribunal chairmen and women were warned in writing by Justice Minister Owen Bonnici that they should regulate themselves. But Dr Mallia ignored the warning and continued to make public statements and appearances, including writing in the pro-labour newspaper l-Orizzont. Other tribunal chairpersons have also failed to pay heed to the minister’s recommendation.
According to the committee’s criteria “knowledge of the Code of Ethics for members of the judiciary” is considered one of the prerequisites for those applying to become judges or magistrates.
Dr Mallia has been given a number of appointments by the Labour government since its return to power in 2013. Apart from presiding over the Small Claims Tribunal, she chairs the Information and Data Protection Appeals Tribunal and the Medicines Review Board, as well as being a member of the board of governors of the Arbiter for Financial Services.
Dr Bonnici has been informed of the committee’s decision. It is not yet known whether he will still push for her nomination to go through.
According to bi-partisan rules agreed during the last legislature, appointments to the bench are only made after applicants are examined by the Judicial Appointments Committee. This comprises the Chief Justice, the Attorney General, the Ombudsman, the Auditor General and the President of the Chamber of Advocates. The committee then recommends whether he or she is suitable to occupy the position of judge or magistrate.
The Justice Minister can still disagree with the committee and propose a failed candidate for the post, but he would have to explain his decision to Parliament.
The case of Dr Mallia is the second known rejection so far. In 2017, sitting Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera was found unfit to be promoted to judge due in part to her conduct in her private life.
Just a year earlier, she was officially rebuked by the judiciary’s watchdog, the Commission for the Administration of Justice, which concluded that while there was no evidence she had acted improperly on the job, she had compromised her integrity by attending parties whose invitees included politicians.
In one case, a politician who was a guest at her birthday party was involved in a court case over which she was presiding. In the case of Magistrate Scerri Herrera, it was Dr Bonnici who had asked the committee for its approval, despite knowing his candidate had infringed the judiciary’s code of ethics.
He did not seek to overturn the committee’s recommendation.
ivan.camilleri@timesofmalta.com