The government official at the centre of the alleged medical visas scandal is claiming that his rights were breached through the mise en scene played out in court on Tuesday when five Libyan witnesses testified in an "amateurish" video conference.

Neville Gafà filed a constitutional application claiming that a series of irregularities had taken place during the last sitting in ongoing libel proceedings instituted against The Malta Independent on Sunday editor David Lindsay.

The five men, claiming that Mr Gafà had asked them for money in exchange for visas and medical treatment meant to be given freely to casualties of the war in Libya, had been allowed to testify before Magistrate Victor George Axiak via a video call that was not only poor in quality but also set up in the absence of a judicial authority at the other end.

Owing to the reduced size of the screen, the image of persons at the other end of the call, was not fully visible to those present inside the Maltese courtroom.

Moreover, each witness was assisted by an Arab interpreter of unknown qualifications, save for the fact that he introduced himself as a teacher.

The entire video conference was conducted in a sitting room - where the Libyan men had at first all been seated on a semicircular sofa - in a disorderly fashion, with evident “communication difficulties” along the way, calling for the court to authorise Mr Lindsay’s lawyer to ask direct questions to the witnesses who were being examined in chief. 

As the hearing progressed, the witnesses were “bombarded” with direct questions by the respondent’s lawyer as the situation inside the courtroom was reduced to one of ”mayhem”.

Moreover, all throughout the hearing, Ivan Grech Mintoff, the person who had testified about the allegations by these Libyan men, was present inside the hall, “taking an active role in the proceedings, constantly muttering suggestions to the interpreter in court and consulting the respondent’s lawyer,” the application read.

All this amounted to a mise en scene set up by the respondent “and those backing him” in an attempt to mask the truth behind these testimonies that were no more than “a publicity stunt involving blatant lies by individuals who were reluctant to return to their homeland,” claimed the applicant.

Such an “amateur” act, which allowed by the court that overruled the objections raised by Mr Gafà’s lawyers at the very outset and allowed the video conference to proceed, was not befitting of a judicial institution and moreover amounted to a breach of the applicant’s right to a fair hearing.

Consequently, the applicant called upon the First Hall, Civil Court, to declare such a breach and to order the removal of the video conference footage and relative transcripts of evidence from the records of the libel proceedings.

The application was signed by lawyers Edward Gatt and Mark Vassallo.