Statements by a kidney transplant patient facing drug trafficking allegations, released to the police not in the presence of his lawyer, are to be removed from the acts of the case, while his later admission in court is to stand.

In a landmark judgment delivered by the Constitutional Court on Friday in the latest twist in the judicial saga surrounding Christopher Bartolo, the 37-year old Gozitan condemned in 2017 to a five-year jail term and a €15,000 fine by the criminal court after pleading guilty to having trafficked cannabis.

Christopher Bartolo

The Court was presided over by Chief Justice Joseph Azzopardi, Mr Justices Giannino Caruana Demajo and Noel Cuschieri.

It is the first time that the Constitutional Court declared as inadmissible a statement obtained after the one-hour consultation with a lawyer.

The accused's legal counsel had subsequently filed constitutional proceedings which had resulted in a pronouncement by the First Hall, Civil Court last November declaring that the man’s fundamental right to a fair trial had been breached when he was denied access to a lawyer during police interrogation.

Returning home after a routine dialysis session, the then-suspect had been met by some six police officers who had submitted him to questioning, searched his residence and then accompanied him to the police station after allegedly discovering 167g of cannabis resin at his home.

During a second interrogation, the man had given in to the ‘direct and persistent questioning’ and had admitted to trafficking drugs.

Read: Kidney patient taken into custody 'after five hours of dialysis’

The Civil Court had observed that Mr Bartolo had only been allowed to consult a lawyer before the first interrogation. No lawyer was actually present during both interrogations, a right only introduced under Maltese law in 2016.

This had resulted in a breach of the man’s right to a fair hearing, leading the court to provide an effective remedy by way of the removal of his police statements from the acts of the case, as well as the right to retract his admission before the Criminal Court.

An appeal was filed by the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner which resulted in today’s judgment by the Constitutional Court which confirmed the removal of the accused’s statements but declared that his admission before the Criminal Court was to stand.

The court declared that the statements had no bearing on the man’s admission in court, since this had been registered in the presence of the lawyer assisting the accused at the time, and, moreover, he had not withdrawn that admission when given the chance to do so, hoping instead for a mitigation in punishment.

However, for the purpose of avoiding a possible breach of Mr Bartolo’s right to a fair trial, the Constitutional Court concluded that the statements, including that released after a one-hour consultation with a lawyer, were to be removed as evidence in his regard.

Allowing them to stand could have a bearing upon the criminal proceedings and any punishment to be eventually meted out, the court declared.

Lawyers Franco Debono and Amadeus Cachia are assisting Mr Bartolo.