Man granted bail after alleged breach of protection order during child handover

A man who allegedly breached a protection order during a child handover outside a police station was granted bail on Thursday, as the court raised concerns over the practice of automatic arrests in such cases.

The father was arrested after he went to the Domestic Violence Unit to report his ex-partner, with whom he shares a child. When police called in the woman for questioning, she alleged that the man had insulted her and threatened to “run her over” during the exchange outside the Birkirkara police station.

He was subsequently arraigned and charged with breaching a protection order issued on November 7, 2024, a suspended sentence handed down on the same day, and a probation order. He was also accused of threatening and insulting the woman.

Defence lawyer Lennox Vella questioned the decision to arraign the man under arrest, describing it as a knee-jerk reaction to a verbal allegation.

“An allegation of a breach of a protection order, and you find yourself immediately arrested and arraigned in court,” Vella remarked. 

The police inspector replied: “That's not what I said,” adding that it was within the prosecutor’s discretion whether to arraign under arrest or by summons.

Pressed by the court, the inspector acknowledged there are internal instructions to arrest suspects in alleged breaches of protection orders—a policy introduced about a year ago.

In court, the man pleaded not guilty to breaching a restraining order imposed on November 7, 2024 and a two-year prison term suspended for four years imposed on the same date. He was also accused of breaching a probation order and threatening and insulting the woman.

Vella requested bail and argued that the accused and alleged victim share a child and there was a contract regulating this. He explained that the woman had filed other reports against the man to which he had admitted to and served some time. However, this case was based on an “outright lie”. The lawyer argued that the woman wanted to go on a boat and requested his client to keep their child for a longer period.

He also highlighted that in previous cases, every time something happens “she would run to the police station and domestic violence unit to report the accused.” The incident allegedly took place in front of a police station while exchanging their child.

“My client called me up and told me ‘she’s insulting me’ and I instructed him to file a report to safeguard his rights,” Vella said, adding that the ‘woman knows that once she walks into the police station and waves her protection order, the man would be immediately arrested.”

He questioned by she did not report him immediately at the Birkirkara police station but only made the allegations once the police sent for her.

“The criminal courts are being used for family and constitutional issues, and everyone is trying to get whatever they can put their hands on,” Vella argued. He concluded that his client was ready to waive his access rights until the woman testifies.

The woman’s lawyer, Edward Gatt, argued that the man was a “repeat offender” on the same charges.

Buhagiar countered that the woman was not going to file a report and it was only when she was called in to give her version did this emerge. The police inspector insisted that there was fear the man would approach the alleged victim.

The court noted that there were internal instructions that when there is an alleged breach of protection order, the suspect should be arraigned under arrest.

“Certain orders and discretions are placing the accused in circumstances where there is no balance with respect to their provisional release from custody,” the court said, adding that this was the first time it came across an arraignment under arrest on alleged breach of a protection order arising from insults. It held that while it appreciated that prosecutors follow instructions, in this particular case the man could have been arraigned under summons.

When factoring in the possible punishment that could be meted out in such a case if the man were to be found guilty, the court said that while it applauded the work carried out to address the issue of domestic violence not ‘every rule strictly applies to every case’.

The man was granted bail against several conditions including a €2,000 deposit and a €3,000 personal guarantee.

Magistrate Nadine Sant Lia presided.

Police inspector Sherona Buhagiar prosecuted while lawyer Lennox Vella appeared for the accused. Lawyer Edward Gatt assisted the alleged victim.