Lawyers representing Yorgen Fenech insisted in court on Wednesday that their client's trial could not take place “in an atmosphere of podcasts,” flagging a series of productions about Daphne Caruana Galizia’s assassination which, they said, had been uploaded in flagrant breach of a court ban.

The matter came to the fore at a pre-trial hearing after lawyer Jason Azzopardi expressed the Caruana Galizia family’s concerns about the passage of time for the start of the trial, adding that the family too had a right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time.

Fenech has been under arrest since November 2019, awaiting trial for his alleged role in the journalist's car bomb murder in October  2017.

Azzopardi’s brief intervention followed the testimony of court expert Martin Bajada who was summoned by the prosecution to update the court on the tasks assigned to him and the possible end date.

Redaction delays

Bajada’s task consisted mainly of preparing redacted copies of the assassinated journalist's correspondence in such manner as to ensure that her sources would not be revealed.

During a previous session before the Magistrates’ Court where the evidence is being compiled, Bajada had indicated February as the date when he would likely wrap up his work.

The case then moved back to the Criminal Court where Bajada was asked to testify.

“As I said ten days ago, the first part [of my task] will be ready by January. The second part, by February,” said Bajada, explaining how he had split his work into two stages.

He first had to read through 23,000 pages, equivalent to 11 books, and redact information according to the directions laid out by the court, he said.

Once that was completed, he would make copies for the parties.

He said it was an arduous, time-consuming task because he sometimes came across fresh information which would necessitate further redaction of previous pages. 

“I will be ready by January but not before,” said Bajada, explaining that in her later days, the victim was “very active.”

He reckoned that 75% of his task was ready.

Under further questioning by the defence, Bajada explained that although he started working on the murder inquiry in 2017, he only received instructions to “censor” the victim’s correspondence in January 2024.

“No one gave me any direction until this court did in 2024,” he said. “So technically I was tasked in January 2024.”

Following that testimony, the expert left the courtroom.

At that stage, Azzopardi addressed the court in the presence of two of the victim’s sisters.

“The parte civile have been silent over the past sittings….The right to a fair hearing applies also to the victim,” he said.

Speaking on behalf of the family, he said they wished to express their concern about the passage of time.

He asked whether the court could order the expert to present “that 75%” of the work that was complete.

'Still compiling evidence'

Without in any way attributing delays to the court, he said the family wanted the judge to know “of their concern.”

“It’s everyone’s concern,” remarked Madam Justice Edwina Grima. “Time has passed and we’re still compiling evidence since we have to safeguard [the victim’s] sources.”

Defence lawyer Charles Mercieca intervened, saying that the defence would have no issue if the court were to revoke the expert’s brief so that the evidence might be presented “as is.”

The court called back Bajada.

“Can you present what is ready?”asked the judge.

“I’ll do as the court orders,” replied the expert.

He said he would produce the 75% completed work before the magistrate presiding over the re-opened compilation of evidence, then proceed with the rest of his task.

At this point Mercieca said that it was good to speak of the right to a fair hearing but that must be observed both in and outside court.

Court order 'being breached'

The Criminal Court, he noted, had twice imposed a ban on publications and comments about Fenech “but those orders were being repeatedly breached outside court".

Mercieca then made reference to a series of podcasts, the first of which was broadcast on September 25, and “every Wednesday since” related to this case.

Every Wednesday, he said, the parte civile were breaching the ban while preaching to others about the rule of law and the right to a fair hearing.

Out of all this, only one party was benefiting.

“Such a virulent press campaign is only against us. How can the trial take place in an environment of podcasts? It cannot go ahead in such an environment,” argued Mercieca.

“Who is doing these podcasts?”asked the judge, adding that the court was totally unaware of the matter.

“The same person banned by your Honour and who subsequently went to challenge that ban before the courts,” said Mercieca.

The defence had in fact presented notes about these podcasts together with transcripts of the script, he said.

“Today is Wednesday. Another one has just been uploaded. We’re filing another note,” said Mercieca.

The court directed the prosecution to summon the police commissioner to the next sitting.

The case continues next week.

Last month blogger Manuel Delia filed a constitutional case, claiming that a court ban on public comments and discussions about Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder case and Yorgen Fenech, breached his freedom of expression and weakened the role of journalists to inform the public.

AG lawyers Anthony Vella, Godwin Cini and Danika Vella prosecuted.

Lawyers Gianluca Caruana Curran and Charles Mercieca were defence counsel.

Lawyer Jason Azzopardi appeared for the Caruana Galizia family.