An inspector who faced disciplinary action on the basis of a police board report has been vindicated after an appeals court confirmed that the report was null and void. 

It found that the police board which investigated the case was wrongly composed and that its findings and its report were beyond its remit. 

The case concerned an August 2013 hold-up took at a convenience shop in Birkirkara. The case was being investigated separately by the CID and the Birkirkara district police. The CID had arrested and arraigned Darryl Luke Borg in connection with the case. Borg pleaded not guilty and was remanded in custody. 

One day later, police inspector Elton Taliana, who was the Birkirkara district inspector, had received confidential information that the person who had really carried out the hold-up was not Borg but a certain Roderick Grech. He arrested Grech who immediately admitted to his involvement in case. He was charged and pleaded guilty to the charges brought against him. That same day, Borg was released from custody and later filed for action claiming breach of human rights. 

He eventually won €150 in compensation. 

Darry Luke Borg

Then-Home Affairs Minister Manuel Mallia asked the police board to investigate what had happened. In its concluding report, the board chastised Inspector Taliana for having, it said, not informed his superiors about the developments. 

Disciplinary action was then instituted against the inspector, who denied the findings of the board and sued minister Mallia, the chairman of the board, the police commissioner and the attorney general.

He argued, among other things, that the board was not properly constituted, it acted beyond its powers, and did not follow the procedure as laid down by law. Mr Justice Joseph Micallef, presiding the Civil Court, had found in his favour.

Decision confirmed on appeal

The Appeals Court, presided over by Chief Justice Mark Chetcuti and judges Giannino Caruana Demajo and Anthony Ellul upheld the conclusions of the first court after it heard that the police board had not been properly constituted. 

The members of the then-police board had asked to resign after the 2013 general election. Their resignation was accepted, but they were asked to remain in their post. Meanwhile, a new board (consisting of new members but the chairman of the old board) was convened on August 10 to consider the mix-up case.

The court concluded that there could not be two police boards at the same time, and powers rested on the first board since it was still in office and had continued to meet. The second board had been improperly constituted, it lacked jurisdiction, and therefore its deliberations and report were null.

The court also upheld the first court’s conclusion that the investigations by the police board and its report regarding Inspector Taliana were null and void as the board had acted beyond its powers.