Liam Debono, currently awaiting trial over the 2018 hit-and-run incident that seriously maimed police officer Simon Schembri, is claiming a breach of his fundamental rights.

Debono, who is serving a five-year prison term over a separate conviction in June 2019, has sought recourse to the constitutional courts, claiming that his rights were breached not only because he was unable to appeal that conviction but also because he was not afforded a fair trial.

He landed the five-year punishment after being spotted by an off-duty policeman driving a Fiat Uno at Luqa while out on bail over the Schembri hit-and-run incident the previous year.

At the time, he was under probation and also under a three-year driving ban placed upon him in terms of a separate 2018 conviction for a number of car thefts.

Debono ended up facing a raft of charges for allegedly breaching probation, the driving ban as well as breaching bail conditions.

He was declared guilty by a Magistrates’ Court and was handed a total term of imprisonment of five years, a 10-year driving ban, a fine of €11,000 and also forfeited a €50,000 bail bond.

Almost two years down the line, Debono is claiming that he was unable to appeal that conviction since his personal lawyer had not renounced his brief, thus enabling the youth to seek legal assistance elsewhere.

No other lawyer was willing to step into the case once the previous lawyer had not yet granted his release, explained veteran lawyer Joseph Brincat, who is now assisting Debono as state aid.

To make matters worse, he was dependent on his mother who, shortly after that episode, had also landed herself behind bars, thus practically making it impossible for Debono to lodge an appeal.

Although at the time of delivery of judgment, he had been assigned a legal aid lawyer, that lawyer was not authorized to file an appeal.

This amounted to a breach of the accused’s right of appeal in criminal matters as safeguarded under Protocol 7 Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, his lawyer argued.

Besides, Debono was denied a fair trial and is likely to suffer a further breach of that right in the upcoming trial, his lawyer said, pointing out that, contrary to what was declared under the European Convention, fundamental rights issues could be raised “in anticipation of a breach.”

The incident over which Debono is to stand trial had caused a national uproar and sparked a barrage of media reports as well as online comments which “seriously implicated” the accused.

It is important to ensure that members of the public, who will ultimately be selected to serve as jurors at the trial, are not “negatively influenced” by such pre-trial publicity, went on the applicant’s lawyer, adding that it was not sufficient for the judge to steer clear of prejudice.

Given local geographical limitations, under our penal system such negative influence could not be obviated by transferring criminal proceedings to a separate jurisdiction, said Brincat, taking a leaf out of Italian procedural law.

But the right to freedom of expression was subject to restrictions to safeguard third-party rights and there could be no right to a fair trial with “constant hammering” about the incident over which Debono is facing trial.

The applicant called upon the First Hall, Civil Court in its constitutional jurisdiction to declare a breach of rights and to provide adequate remedies even to ensure that Debono faces justice without suffering prejudice.

Lawyer Joseph Brincat signed the application.