A man and a woman facing the prospect of forfeiting their bail bonds and personal freedom after being caught outside their home after curfew hours have secured a passage to challenge that forfeiture before the constitutional courts. 

Maria Patricia De Las Heras and Christoph Jorge Valdivia Docio had been arrested along with four other Spanish nationals after the party of six were caught drinking at a Spinola bar on a Friday night, at a time when bars were locked down under COVID-19 measures.

As police officers attempted to take down their personal details, some commotion broke out and the six allegedly acted aggressively, shoving one sergeant and damaging a squad car and radio. 

All six people were subsequently arraigned, three of them immediately registering an admission while the others, including De Las Heras and Valdivia Docio, entered a plea of not guilty.

Both were granted bail against a guarantee of €5,000 each and under several other conditions including an order to stay indoors after 11pm.

Yet, four months later, the couple landed in fresh trouble after being found outside after curfew hours.

They both admitted to the alleged wrongdoing and their lawyers requested a pre-sentencing report.

Pending preparation of that report, the accused filed an application before the Magistrates’ court presiding over their case, requesting a reference to the First Hall, Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction.

Their lawyers, Franco Debono and Amadeus Cachia, argued that the 2015 amendments to the Criminal Code had introduced a “blanket provision” which allowed the courts no discretion by imposing forfeiture of the bail bond when a person was found guilty of breaching bail conditions.

Whether that breach was a serious one or minimal, the court’s hands were tied and, consequently, the current scenario could give rise to “arbitrary and disproportionate” punishment.  

Just last week, the two lawyers had thrashed out similar arguments before the Criminal Court in another case concerning a murder suspect who is likewise contesting such mandatory forfeiture of the bail bond, amounting to some €31,000 in his case.

During that hearing, a lawyer from the Attorney General’s office had drawn attention to the fact that pending those proceedings, a bill had been tabled in Parliament to alter the current scenario by allowing “a wider margin of judicial discretion with regard to the forfeiture of bail bonds”.

Presiding over the case of the two Spaniards on Thursday morning Magistrate Josette Demicoli upheld the request for a constitutional reference, declaring that it was “not frivolous nor vexatious”.

When the breach of bail conditions was proven, the confiscation of bail monies was mandatory, observed Magistrate Demicoli, adding that such a breach would also bring about the accused’s re-arrest as well as possible jail term and/or a fine.

The accused’s claim that the law itself allegedly gave rise to discrimination and abuse and thus breached their fundamental rights, was not for this court to decide upon, concluded the Magistrate, thus referring the matter to the First Hall, Civil Court. 

Inspector Leeroy Balzan Engerer is prosecuting. 

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.