A court decision which found that minister Owen Bonnici repeatedly breached activists' rights has earned him a comparison to former Labour politician Lorry Sant.
Constitutional expert Tonio Borg told Times of Malta that one had to go back to the Lorry Sant years to find another example where a minister was found to have directly breached a person’s human rights.
One of the Labour Party’s most controversial figures, Mr Sant was a minister in the 1970s and 1980s who was known for his rough approach and was later held responsible for human rights violations.
Dr Borg, a former European Commissioner and once a deputy prime minister, said there had been cases in recent history when a minister was found to have indirectly breached human rights due to the actions of officials under his control, but Mr Sant was the last minister to have been found directly in breach.
Dr Borg observed how the Constitutional Court had found Dr Bonnici directly responsible for the order to clear the memorial to Daphne Caruana Galizia on a daily basis.
He noted that the minister had been found guilty of “pique”, and was even found to have used the restoration of the Great Siege memorial as a reason to impede freedom of expression. Dr Borg noted how the court had thrown out the argument that the flowers and candles placed at the foot of the memorial was “litter”.
“The judge said these candles and flowers were a form of freedom of expression. The court also found the restoration of the Great Siege monument was used to disrupt freedom of expression,” Dr Borg said.
He said the court had also noted how the candles and flowers were even removed when they were placed outside the hoarding protecting the monument throughout the restoration process. Dr Borg said the court took this as a sign it was not true to state the protest symbols were being removed because damage was being done to the monument.
“The judge said the monument had been turned into a source of division. The monument was made divisive by the minister, not Occupy Justice,” Dr Borg said.
The legal scholar said Dr Bonnici’s failure to appeal the decision was effectively an admittance of guilt.
“By not appealing, the minister is admitting his actions amounted to pique, and the restoration of the monument was done to impede freedom of expression”.