In a disgraceful display of misplaced priorities, the attorney general has made a decision that is not only cruel and defies common sense but also undermines the principles of justice.

The decision by Victoria Buttigieg to issue terrorism charges against three young men involved in the El Hiblu 3 ship saga is a travesty and an alarming reflection of a justice system gone astray.

The lawyers for the three men have repeatedly insisted that they acted as mediators between the crew of the ship and a group of desperate asylum seekers in 2018. Their only crime: they were the ones who could communicate with the crew in English. The three – then aged just 15, 16, and 19 – were speaking on behalf of a group of over 100 migrants rescued at sea who feared they were being taken back to Libya.

Through their mediation, they are believed to have calmed down what would have otherwise been a dangerous situation and helped prevent what would have been an illegal pushback.

When they eventually reached Malta, they were charged with commandeering a ship and threatening the crew. They were locked in prison for seven long months before being granted bail, with a 30-year prison sentence hanging over them.

While the AG should always be driven by justice, she cannot ignore the mountains of evidence that shows that the ‘terrorism’ charges are nothing short of outrageous.

She should not have ignored that,  since then, more evidence has emerged about the unreliability of the testimony of the Libyan ship owner (who describes himself as a ‘pirate’ on Facebook) as well as other crew members.

She cannot ignore the fact she has decided to proceed with a case over which the courts of Malta have no jurisdiction. There is good reason why more than 1,000 organisations and personalities have called for the trumped-up charges to be dropped.

Adding insult to injury, the AG’s selective application of justice becomes evident when contrasting this case with others under her purview.

Charges were dropped against an individual accused of attempting to kill police officers during a botched bank heist.

Furthermore, the AG’s intervention to shield former Pilatus Bank officials from prosecution, as indicated by an inquiring magistrate, raises concerns.

She was also accused of failing to provide the police with authorisation to arrest a notorious gaming consultant, against whom a German arrest warrant was issued over tax evasion.

These are just three outrageous examples in a country where two men charged with killing a migrant because of the colour of his skin are still out on bail.

Amnesty International said the El Hiblu indictment has been marred by serious procedural irregularities, including the detention of the then children in adult facilities, their prosecution in adult courts and the failure to call key witnesses to testify. 

“The attorney general has taken more than four-and-a-half years to make the worst possible decision,” Amnesty said.

Rule of law NGO Repubblika said Malta is seeking to make a harsh example of the three to collectively condemn all those guilty of trying to seek a better life for themselves.

The AG’s decision to pursue the case risks tarnishing Malta’s reputation on the international stage further. And with the international spotlight on this case, including the Council of Europe, this is something the country can ill afford.

The only hope remains in a magistrate who really understands the need to really uphold justice and throw out this baseless case as soon as possible.