A court has been asked to issue an interim measure to stop the assignment of duties to newly-appointed members of the judiciary, with a lawyer arguing that there would be 'judicial Armageddon' if their decisions were to be eventually annulled.
The civil society NGO Repubblika is contesting the appointments, arguing that the government should first implement the recommendations of the Venice Commission on rule of law to ensure the judges and magistrates are truly independent.
The case contesting the appointments was filed on Thursday, hours before the appointments were actually made. Three new judges and three magistrates were appointed.
Lawyers (and Nationalist MPs) Jason Azzopardi and Simon Busuttil, who filed the application, on Monday traded arguments with Attorney General Peter Grech, assisted by lawyer Victoria Buttigieg.
Read: PM slams ‘absurd’ request asking for courts to be ‘paralysed’
Dr Grech said an interim measure had already been requested by the NGO last Thursday, referring to the request for the court to order the government not to appoint the new judges and magistrates until the current system of appointment was changed.
Such a request was repetitive and ran counter to the principles of “ne bis in idem” (no legal action can be instituted twice) and “res judicata,” (a matter that has been adjudicated) Dr Grech continued.
Mr Justice Mark Chetcuti said this was not quite the same. One was subject to executive discretion.
Dr Grech said that once a person was appointed to the bench, one would expect that person to perform the judicial duties assigned accordingly.
Dr Azzopardi said one had to imagine the ramifications if all decisions taken by these newly-appointed members of the judiciary were to be annulled. It would be like a “judicial Armageddon.”
Dr Busuttil also argued for a preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice, pointing out that a similar request had been made and upheld in a case concerning Poland.
“I don’t see why we are to be treated any differently to Poland,” remarked Dr Busuttil.
After hearing arguments made by both sides, the court minuted that the request for an interim measure to stop the newly-appointed members of the judiciary from being assigned their duties was “substantially different” to that put forward last Thursday.
As for the preliminary reference to the European Court, it said that such a request could be submitted before the First Hall, Civil Court, in its constitutional jurisdiction and it was up to that court to decide whether the circumstances were such as to merit the reference.
The court granted the NGO time to file two separate applications clearly stating “the precise requests and legal basis” for the said interim measure.
The case was adjourned to Monday.