A Constitutional Court lambasted Malta for failing to successfully address the problem of excessive court delays.

The court said the country was lacking in its duty to provide the judicial system with the necessary resources to ensure speed and efficiency. It also criticised those running the judicial system, saying inertia meant that courts retained the same work system “because it has always been so”.

In January, a Dutchman was awarded €5,000 in damages after a court found that his fundamental human rights had been violated due to the excessive delay in concluding the criminal proceedings against him, which lasted over seven years.

In an appeal filed in February, the Attorney General argued that the damages awarded to Samuel Onyeabor were too high. He listed a number of cases which took longer to decide and where compensation was below €5,000.

In 2008, two Estonians were arrested after almost six kilograms of cocaine were found in their luggage. The haul was valued at almost €600,000. They cooperated with the police, helping them arrest other suspects involved in international drug trafficking.

The police were informed that Mr Onyeabor was due to fly in from Brussels to collect the cocaine. He was arrested upon arrival, though no drugs were found in his possession.

The Attorney General said the investigations were very complex and this had led to delays in the criminal proceedings. The Constitutional Court, presided over by Mr Justice Giannino Caruana Demajo, sitting with Mr Justice Noel Cuschieri and Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon, agreed that the case was complex but added that this did not mean that over six years was required to complete proceedings and issue a bill of indictment.

The delays were not due to the complexity of the case but due to failures in the judicial system that allowed for witnesses to be heard periodically and for sittings to be put off because the court or the prosecution had more urgent cases to deal with.

“The problem of delays is a systematic one and not only reserved to this particular case. The State’s failings are therefore much more serious and become even more so if, despite the many instances of delays condemned by this court, the problem remains unaddressed,” the three judges said.

The Constitutional Court threw out the Attorney General’s appeal.