A judge has confirmed a decision suspending challenge proceedings in a case involving Pilatus Bank and their reassignment from Magistrate Nadine Lia to another magistrate. The State Advocate has been granted leave to appeal.

The challenge is being made by rule of law NGO Repubblika for the police commissioner to take criminal action against several former top officials of Pilatus Bank.

Repubblika also are claiming that Magistrate Lia should not be the one hearing the challenge since she has a conflict of interest, her father-in-law, Pawlu Lia having served as counsel to public figures close to the Egrant inquiry where Pilatus Bank featured prominently.

In a decree read out in court on Monday, Mr Justice Ian Spiteri Bailey observed that there appeared to be an agreement between the parties that such “sensitive and particular” issues ought to be filtered by the Constitutional Court. The court shared the same view and before Repubblika’s case proceeded on the merits, this matter ought therefore to be scrutinised by the Constitutional Court.

The judge noted with approval how during the previous sitting, the State Advocate’s lawyers had suggested requesting Magistrate Lia to put off hearing the challenge pending a decision on the issue debated in the constitutional proceedings.

The judge noted with approval how during the previous sitting, the State Advocate’s lawyers had suggested requesting Magistrate Lia to put off hearing the challenge pending a decision on the issue debated in the constitutional proceedings.

Magistrate's decree could not be found in records

The day after the parties had reached that agreement, Magistrate Lia issued a decree saying that the challenge proceedings had been adjourned for ulterior information since September 15, even though no request to that effect had been forwarded by either of the parties.

Mr Justice Spiteri Bailey said he was informed of this decree but was somewhat perplexed by the fact that neither Repubblika nor the State Advocate had made reference to it when making submissions about the suspension of the hearings.

Then after checking the records of the case, the judge said he found no such decree dated September 15.

However on September 22, Magistrate Lia had adjourned the case in such manner that the parties appeared to have understood that the case would continue being heard. 

Although the position taken by Magistrate Lia offered “relief,” it was not enough, remarked the judge.

It would be in the best interests of justice to give effect to the court’s decision so that the challenge proceedings might continue before another magistrate, went on the judge.

For this reason, the court rejected the State Advocate’s request to suspend its order (a so-called interim measure) ordering instead that the decree be served once again upon the Court Registrar to put into effect.

The court observed that it should not make a difference to the police commissioner and State Advocate if the challenge is heard by another magistrate

The case was adjourned to January but the judge stated that these proceedings would await the outcome of the State Advocate’s appeal before the Constitutional Court.

Repubblika was represented by Robert Aquilina, Manuel Delia and Alessandra Dee Crespo, assisted by lawyer Jason Azzopardi.

Lawyers James D’Agostino and Isaac Zammit represented the State Advocate.