Lawyer Jason Azzopardi will file a constitutional case claiming that his fundamental rights have been breached once his appeals to investigate Gozo Minister Clint Camilleri are scrapped, following the enactment of the magisterial inquiry reform as law.

“Once the reform is published in the Government Gazette, I am anticipating that my appeal will not be heard under the new law,” Azzopardi told a judge on Wednesday.

The magisterial inquiry reform was passed through Parliament last week, but the reform will only be enacted once it is published in the Government Gazette.

Under the new law, citizens will no longer be able to directly request a magistrate to open an inquiry but will first have to approach the police. If the police do not take action, citizens can then take their case to a judge, who will decide if an investigation is merited.

The new law states that any pending requests to open a magisterial inquiry are scrapped.

Currently, Azzopardi is contesting a magistrate’s decision to turn down three requests for a probe into Camilleri, claiming that a different magistrate from the one handling the case authored the rejection.

The enactment of the new law means that Azzopardi’s three ongoing appeals, which will most likely not come to a conclusion before the new law is enacted, will be thrown out.

On Wednesday, Mr Justice Aaron Bugeja said he understood Azzopardi’s concern, however, he said he must “function according to the proceedings”.

The judge was presiding over two appeals that Azzopardi made against Magistrate Brigette Sultana’s decision not to investigate Camilleri about a road in Nadur that went over budget and the construction of an Olympic-sized swimming pool in Victoria.

Camilleri’s lawyer, Stephen Tonna Lowell, said that, in his capacity as a lawyer, he believes that the court should work according to the transitory provision.

In light of the situation Azzopardi is in, he pledged to the court that he shall be filing a constitutional case, arguing that his rights have been breached under the new law.

Azzopardi also referred to a judgment by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in 2016 against Hungary, and a 1989 judgment in the case of Joseph Barbara against the Prime Minister.

“The applicant is declaring that his fundamental rights, under Articles 37 and 39 of the Constitution... will be breached,” Azzopardi told the court.

How did we get here?

In December 2024, Azzopardi filed three separate requests to open a magisterial inquiry into Gozo Minister Clint Camilleri. The three requests were: to investigate the road works in Nadur that went over budget, berthing rights in Mġarr, and works on a sports centre swimming pool in Victoria.

Magistrate Brigette Sultana rejected all three requests that Azzopardi made to probe Camilleri. Azzopardi appealed all these decisions.

In all his appeals, Azzopardi says he has reason to believe that the inquiring magistrate did not write the court decrees rejecting his probe requests. He claimed that Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech wrote them.

In support of his claim, Azzopardi wrote that the “properties” of the court decree rejecting a request in Camilleri’s swimming pool document showed that Frendo Dimech was its author.

On Tuesday, Camilleri’s lawyer, Stephen Tonna Lowell, filed a court application asking that the testimonies of court expert Stephen Farrugia Sacco and Magistrate Sultana’s registrar Margaret Debattista, from another case, be included in this case.

They were testifying in front of Madame Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera, who presided over Azzopardi’s appeal against the magistrate’s decision not to investigate the berthing rights in Mġarr.

Azzopardi did not object to this, and the judge agreed with the request.

However, the minister also requested that Magistrate Sultana’s court attorney, John Mary Vella, testify in this case.

Azzopardi objected to this request, arguing that the minister had weeks to file this request, as he was first notified about the appeal on March 14. However, he chose to file this at the “eleventh hour.”

He argued that this was an attempt to delay proceedings, however, Tonna Lowell denied this claim.

Azzopardi also argued that the attorney’s testimony would be unrelated to both appeals.

The judge said that he will give his decision on this matter after seeing the testimonies of Farrugia Sacco and Debattista.

Lawyer Ramon Bonett Sladden represented the Attorney General.

Defence lawyer Stephen Tonna Lowell represented the minister.

Defence lawyer Charles Mercieca represented Godwin Agius.

Defence lawyer Arthur Azzopardi represented John Borg.