A murder trial has been postponed for the second time in a week pending the outcome of an appeal filed by the victim’s family. 

Etienne Bartolo was due to stand trial over the murder of Mr Grech, 26, who was stabbed to death in March 2017. The two had allegedly met to settle a debt over drugs when an argument broke out. 

The case was first postponed on Monday because the list of jurors had not been published in the Government Gazette.  

Relatives allege rights breach

The jurors then appeared in court on Wednesday, only to be notified of an application filed by the victim’s family claiming a potential breach of their rights. 

In the application, filed before the First Hall of the Civil Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction, Roderick Grech’s relatives asked for the postponement of the trial.

They claimed potential breaches of their rights, including over the fact that the juror’s list had not been published, that the case had been given too much media attention and because of the uncertainty over the way trials are heard in Malta. 

Through their lawyers Franco Debono, Amadeus Cachia, Angie Muscat and Marion Camilleri, the victim’s relatives insisted that the jurors could not serenely arrive at a verdict, especially since they had already been to court in vain on Monday. 

The lawyers also wanted an explanation as to what happened on Sunday evening, when someone realised that the jurors’ list had not been published. 

Mr Justice Robert Mangion had initially thrown out the complaints, saying that the trial could go ahead because this would not cause irremediable damage to the victim’s relatives. 

But when the case began being heard before Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera and after the jurors had already been waiting in the court’s corridors for quite some time, the victims’ lawyers informed the court of their intention to appeal the decision. 

At one point, the jurors were even told that they could go for a coffee and return to court in an hour. 

Madam Justice Scerri Herrera eventually called the jurors into her courtroom to explain what had happened and apologised for having kept them waiting. 

She said the case could not be heard until the appeal before the Constitutional Court is decided.