Magistrate Monica Vella suspended over administrative shortcomings
Vella has since appealed the decision
Magistrate Monica Vella has been suspended from her duties following complaints over delays and administrative shortcomings, Times of Malta has learned.
Vella has appealed the decision and continues to serve on the bench pending the outcome of the appeal. If she loses the appeal, she could file a case in front of the constitutional court to have the suspension overturned.
The suspension is expected to last around a month if it comes into effect. It is believed to be linked to administrative failings, particularly delays in issuing written sentences following court rulings.
After a judgment has been delivered in court, a magistrate is expected to issue the written sentence, explaining the reasoning behind the sentence and referencing the legal provisions applied in the sentencing.
Sources have pointed to a series of factors, including a disproportionately high workload to shortcomings among some of her staff members, as a possible cause of the delays.
According to latest figures published by the Court Services Agency, Vella had 1,897 pending criminal or tribunal cases on her plate as of February, more than most other magistrates.
Most of these (over 1,400) were tribunal cases but she was also conducting 141 ongoing inquiries, also more than most of her peers.
Vella has come under scrutiny for similar administrative troubles before. Last year, she was given a dressing down by Mr Justice Lawrence Mintoff after a court official testified that she had failed to pass on her case files.
Earlier still, Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti had reassigned her criminal and civil cases in the Gozo court, with sources pinning the unorthodox move on delays.
Vella, a former mayor of Xewkija, was appointed magistrate in May 2015. When contacted, her lawyer Michael Sciriha said he is precluded from commenting on the matter, given the confidential nature of proceedings.
Attempts to contact the chief justice for comment were also unsuccessful.
Disciplinary proceedings against members of judiciary are tightly guarded, with hearings held in secret.
They are initiated through a report filed by either the chief justice or the justice minister, with the matter eventually ending up in front of the committee for judges and magistrates, within the commission for the administration of justice, which delivers its verdict.
A bill published earlier this week is proposing to reform the system by introducing the figure of a standards commissioner for the judiciary to receive and investigate complaints.