Former Nationalist Party Minister Giovanna Debono was awarded €5,000 in damages in a libel suit she had filed against Kurt Farrugia as former editor of the now-extinct news portal maltastar.com.
The Labour Party English language portal had published a story back in April 2008 titled “Bitterly bitten Nadur families fight back, claim ‘abuse of power’ by Giovanna” alleging that the then-Gozo Minister had taken advantage of a temporary stint as acting Prime Minister “to recommend the acquisition of a piece of land which makes part of a belvedere mysteriously developed in front of her driver’s house in Nadur”.
The story alleged that the belvedere had been purposely designed to prevent any private development of the land, thus ensuring that no third party property would “block the splendid sea and country views which the Gozo Minister’s driver has from his home.
When delivering judgment, almost 12 years after publication of the story, the court, presided over by magistrate Gabriella Vella, observed that the title itself, alleging “abuse of power” was libellous.
The court observed that in such proceedings the applicant had to prove that the article was defamatory, that it targeted the applicant and that the contents thereof were published or shared with third parties.
On the basis of evidence put forward, there was “little doubt that the applicant, who was Gozo Minister at the time, had proved all three necessary elements,” the court said.
It was up to the respondent to prove that the writing presented an expression of opinion, a value judgment and a fair comment done in good faith on a matter of public interest, the court went on.
In this case, Mr Farrugia had written the article based on information passed on to him by a couple who had been directly hit by the expropriation and who had immediately rushed to the newsroom with their allegations in respect of then Minister Debono.
Without verifying the relative notices published in the Government Gazette nor conducting any sort of research into the process of expropriation, the respondent had simply penned the story, later claiming in court that he had simply been reporting “what the family had alleged”.
Moreover, the respondent had claimed that the minister had not availed herself of the right of reply on the Labour media, an argument thrown out by the Court as “totally unfounded”.
The court held that the article was indeed defamatory and liquidated damages to the tune of €5,000 payable by Mr Farrugia, together with costs.
Although a public figure is subject to public scrutiny and criticism, that criticism was to be “correct, just and based on well-researched facts that were verified, rather than mere vindictive inventions intended to damage the public political figure at all costs, as was the article in question”.