Chief Justice requests standards investigation into Wenzu Mintoff after letter
Mintoff sent an explosive five-page letter to all ministers this week
Updated 3.58pm
The Chief Justice has asked the Judiciary Standards Commissioner to investigate Judge Laurence (Wenzu) Mintoff after he sent an explosive five-page letter to all ministers this week, the Times of Malta is informed.
Under the judiciary’s code of ethics, judges cannot communicate with members of the executive about their job.
“Judges must not communicate privately with members of the executive on any subject relating to their duties and functions except through the intervention of, or after express consultation with, the most senior Magistrate and/or the Chief Justice,” the judiciary code of ethics says.
As per procedure following an investigation, Standards Commissioner Toni Abela will pass on his conclusions to the Chief Justice, who can then ask the Commission for the Administration of Justice to deliberate.
The Commission is the only body with the ability to discipline judges and magistrates. It has the power to issue a citation for a magistrate or judge, reduce pay, issue a suspension and even remove them from their post.
On Tuesday morning, Times of Malta revealed that Laurence Mintoff - who was named as the Nationalist Party’s man of choice for chief justice - sent a “kamikaze letter” to the cabinet a few days ago.
“Whatever chance there was of him being nominated has now evaporated,” a minister said, following the letter which was also described as "radioactive".
Among other things, Mintoff alleges that Abela, in his time as a lawyer and Labour MP, pressured the judge's staff to increase the taxable amount owed in a case he was involved in, to allow him to bump up his compensation by “thousands” of euros.
Mintoff also alleges that Abela threatened to have her sacked and implied Judge Mintoff had colluded with then-President Marie Louise Coleiro Preca to keep the taxable amount down.
Mintoff adds that the prime minister told him that he wanted to delay the appointment of a replacement for Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti until after the election.
Mintoff also demanded that the prime minister recuse himself from any talks concerning the appointment of the next chief justice.
Sources within the PN confirmed with Times of Malta that the PN had put forward Mintoff’s name, 24 hours after the government proposed Madam Justice Miriam Hayman for the post.
A former MP and Labour Party official, Mintoff was sworn in as a judge in July 2014. During his time as a politician, Mintoff briefly broke ranks and co-founded Alternattiva Demokratika together with Toni Abela and Arnold Cassola, before rejoining the Labour Party.
At one point, he also served as the editor of the PL’s weekly KullĦadd newspaper.
In his inaugural sitting as judge, Mintoff addressed his chequered political career, admitting “there were times, in my previous field, when I swam against the current … when I felt that I could not but follow my conscience regardless of the consequences. For this I paid a high price, one I do not regret paying.”
It is understood that Mintoff's name was among a list of four the PN had proposed earlier this month, leading with Madam Justice Edwina Grima and including judges Anthony Ellul and Francesco Depasquale.
Justice Minister declines to comment
Contacted for comment, Justice Minister Jonathan Attard said he did "not wish to enter into any controversy concerning a sitting judge," adding that "everyone is entitled to form their own view on the matter".
"My focus remains firmly on ensuring that the process leading to the appointment of a Chief Justice is carried out responsibly. In this context, last Wednesday, the government has put forward a second name for the Opposition’s consideration," he said.
Attard said the government and opposition met on Monday for further discussions but "the opposition has not yet communicated a position on the individual proposed by the Government".
"One of these criteria, in particular, related to ensuring that the nominee would neither serve an excessively long term nor an unduly short one".
"Apart from this, there is also our clear and unequivocal position that there should be no influence or pressure from third parties who are not involved in the process".