A man who was acquitted after an 11-year saga at the criminal courts has been awarded €5,000 in compensation for “undue and unreasonable delay”.

Andrea Stellato had been targeted by criminal prosecution in August 2006 over charges of domestic violence. He was convicted in May 2011 and given an 18-month jail term suspended for three years.

He promptly appealed the conviction and six years down the line, a final decision was delivered whereby the Court of Criminal Appeal revoked the judgment, cleared the appellant of all accusations, save for that of violence against a close relative. The court changed the punishment to a two-year conditional discharge and revoked the protection order that had been in force.

Feeling aggrieved by the delay faced during the appeal proceedings, the man filed for constitutional redress, claiming that his right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time, had been breached.

The First Hall, Civil Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction, presided over by Mr Justice Robert Mangion, observed that there had been no delay for the appointment of the appeal, this having been done within four months of the filing.

That had been followed by oral submissions, after which, the case had been adjourned for judgment.

That was when the delay set in, observed the Court, pointing out that there had been a six-year wait until final judgment was delivered.

A detailed examination of the records of the case showed that “the delay could be attributed to shortcomings on the part of the judicial authority, since adjournments were set under court order, for various reasons,” said the court.

The judge presiding over the criminal appeal had occasionally been called to preside over the superior court of appeal and sometimes, adjournments were given because the court required “more time”.

Referring to pronouncements by the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights, Mr Justice Mangion declared that “every State is responsible for guaranteeing sufficient resources for judicial authorities to be able to operate with utmost efficiency”.

In this case, there had been “undue and unreasonable delay” which amounted to a breach of rights and which, thereby, merited compensation to the tune of €5,000 in favour of the applicant.

Lawyers Joe Giglio and Sarah Mifsud assisted the applicant.