Gżira mayor Conrad Borg Manche’ has been awarded moral damages over a Facebook comment posted by fellow councillor Shaun Farrugia alleging that the mayor had “curried favour with the university rector so as to pass his exam”.

It all started on March 14, 2021, when Farrugia shared a post by Roberta Metsola along with a personal comment stating, “I want this tribal blue and red mentality in our country to disappear once and for all.”

Another comment followed, this time directed towards Borg Manche’ whom Farrugia labelled “a hypocrite”, making reference to some issue that had cropped up during a meeting.

That comment triggered a flurry of exchanges between Farrugia and the mayor, with the councillor claiming that Borg Manche’ did not hold residents’ interests at heart and that he had to join the public sector to get himself a job.

Borg Manche’ retorted in a sarcastic tone, calling Farrugia a liar and commenting about his poor spelling.

Farrugia finished off the heated spat with a parting shot which implied that Borg Manche’ had sought favours from the university rector to pass his exam.

At the time, Borg Manche’ was studying law at the university. He denied ever seeking anyone’s favour to get through his exams.

He subsequently filed libel proceedings against Farrugia.

When delivering judgment the court, presided over by Magistrate Rachel Montebello, concluded that when such a statement was directed towards a person holding public office, it was undoubtedly defamatory since it could tarnish his reputation.

The applicant had testified that it had taken him years to build that reputation.

Farrugia’s comment could give rise to the impression in the mind of an ordinary reader that Borg Manche’ had attained his academic achievements by unethical means, implying that he was not able to get there on his own steam.

As a person holding a public office, such a statement could impinge upon the trust placed in him by the public and also discredit him in his functions as mayor.

That role called for a significant degree of seriousness, integrity and accountability and Farrugia’s comment could suggest that Borg Manche’ may have used his public position for his own advantage. 

The comment could not be considered simply as some minor impoliteness or joke.

During the proceedings, Farrugia had sought to justify his remark by claiming that he had only been reacting to Borg Manche’s own taunts about his spelling mistakes.

What he actually meant was that the mayor had not put up any resistance to the University’s suggested projects nor put forward any proposals that would benefit Gżira residents, he said. 

After examining the “litany of sarcastic comments and insults” the court observed that Farrugia’s comments came hot on the heels of three consecutive comments by Borg Manche’ who called him “stupid and a liar.”

In such circumstances, Farrugia was justified in reacting the way he did against such an attack on his own reputation, but he had exceeded the limits when making that specific allegation that went far beyond the parameters of the issue which had triggered the heated exchange.

Nor had Farrugia proved his plea of fair comment or honest opinion, failing to produce evidence to show that Borg Manche’ had truly passed his exam because he was favoured by the rector.

When meting out moral damages, the court noted that the defamatory comment had been posted on Farrugia’s Facebook profile which had a limited number of followers, thus the damage was limited.

Moreover, Borg Manche’s own attacks had prompted Farrugia’s statement and the mayor’s reputation did not appear to have suffered any actual harm.

However, Farrugia had never tendered an apology.

The court thus ordered Farrugia to pay €500 in moral damages, reiterating that the right to freedom of expression was not to be construed as affording protection to anyone who made public comments without making the necessary verifications.