MP calls for gender equality at law courts

Labour MP Helena Dalli has called on the government to set up a task force to investigate where any gender bias existed in the law courts.

She told parliament during the debate on the courts and tribunals procedures bill that one could, for example, look into the procedure used in molestation cases, the issue of maintenance in separation cases, and, indeed, also assess why many women were reluctant to go to court even though they had strong cases.

The legal system also needed to reflect the changes made over the years bringing about sexual equality.

She felt there should be a stronger presence of women in the law courts. Unfortunately, there was no woman serving as a judge.

Mrs Dalli regretted that despite the many reported cases of domestic violence, too few cases were ending up in court, mostly because the system did not afford women the protection they needed to proceed with their case. Indeed, what had become of the long promised law on domestic violence?

At last the setting up of the family court was finally approaching. This, it was hoped, would ease the hardship felt by the innocent victims of disputes, particularly children.

Notary Charles Mangion (MLP) also underlined the need for the family court and said the government should ensure it was backed by the resources it needed to function efficiently.

He said the problem of court delays was invariably ascribed to various factors, including the modus operandi of the members of the legal profession, who had no incentive to ensure that lawsuits were quickly settled.

It was important for all involved, starting from the judicature, to have a good sense of management. This could be helped by the introduction of certain practices that would obviate the need for small-scale squabbles to be settled in court. Indeed, the process of pre-trial negotiation should be started off by the parties' legal advisers themselves.

Notary Mangion said he could not understand the reluctance of several to resort to arbitration. The system was used even internationally to settle disputes involving huge amounts of money, as well as civil disagreements. Motor vehicle insurance companies and their underwriters had realised the advantages of arbitration for the quicker settlement of claims.

Up to 25 per cent of lawsuits in the courts involved motor insurance claims. If everybody was comprehensively insured and left it up to his insurer to decide on liability and settle the issue, the situation in the courts was bound to improve.

Notary Mangion said he disagreed with the clause in the bill banning judges from holding other posts, including those in sports. This practice belied society's belief in their competence and integrity. Besides, a judge or magistrate should never be pushed into social isolation because of his judiciary position; indeed, having access to people in various situations outside the courts made for a better understanding of life in general.

Winding up, Justice Minister Austin Gatt said he was pleased that, saving some changes that would be discussed in committee stage, the opposition was in agreement with the bill.

He did not agree that the bill had been rushed, as had been claimed. The clause was the result of detailed consultations and he had also sent several drafts to the opposition before the bill was published.

On the master system, Dr Gatt said the practice followed so far had not been covered by legislation. The provisions established in the bill followed the suggestions of the judiciary. Indeed the system was being improved as the judiciary and the legal profession saw fit.

The bill represented the legal steps necessary for the setting up of the family court by next March. Technical details would be discussed in committee.

Reacting to comments by Dr Anglu Farrugia on files having gone missing, making it difficult for people to file appeals, Dr Gatt said the situation was different from what Dr Farrugia had been told. A handbook given to the judiciary made it clear that deputy registrars assigned to the judges were responsible for the documents of each case being heard by the judge and not the director general.

The bill was given a second reading.