A court on Thursday started hearing proceedings filed by Yorgen Fenech, who is challenging the police commissioner to prosecute Melvin Theuma for perjury.
The businessman, who is currently awaiting trial for alleged complicity to murder Daphne Caruana Galizia, is claiming that police failed to take criminal action against the self-confessed middleman in the murder plot over “half-truths” and “blatant lies” when testifying in the murder case.
Fenech’s lawyers first filed a criminal complaint at the Valletta police station on October 22, calling upon the police commissioner to investigate the matter.
But when no action ensued, they filed an application in court challenging the commissioner to act.
Citing extracts from testimonies and secret voice recordings which had formed a crucial part of evidence put forward during the murder compilation, Fenech’s lawyers claimed that Theuma had testified falsely and that every reference to the businessman’s involvement in the plot was a “total fabrication.”
Theuma’s lawyers had filed their own application for the police commissioner to take criminal action against Fenech for calumny and moral violence against their client, who is expected to testify again the businessman’s trial.
On Thursday, Fenech’s challenge proceedings kicked off before Magistrate Nadine Lia.
While Fenech sat in court under the usual tight escort, the court mapped the way forward after lawyers Charles Mercieca and Gianluca Caruana Curran voiced their first requests in the presence of Inspector Daryl Borg and lawyer Lynn Schembri from the police legal unit.
“The challenge does not enter into the merits. It’s simply to determine whether the police commissioner failed to act,” stated the court.
For that purpose Fenech’s lawyers were requesting the registrar of the criminal courts to present copies of certain testimonies and voice recordings referred to in the footnotes to Fenech’s challenge application.
“There are no secrets here,”explained Fenech's lawyer Charles Mercieca, adding that the application, together with a USB drive with all recordings had been communicated to the police.
They also intended to summon three persons to the witness stand, he said, indicating that these individuals were mentioned in the original application.
The court directed the lawyers to file two separate notes with reference to the requested testimonies and audio recordings as well as an application requesting the transcripts thereof.
Meanwhile the inspector handling the challenge proceedings was to be given sufficient time to take cognizance of this data.
Finally Fenech’s lawyers are to supply the names of those who would be summoned as witnesses and this by no later than two weeks before the next hearing.
The case continues next month.