Richard Cachia Caruana, former personal assistant to prime ministers Eddie Fenech Adami and Lawrence Gonzi, has won a libel suit against Labour MP and former minister Joe Mizzi over allegations made during an interview on One TV implying that he was involved in “obstruction of justice,” with links to persons in drug circles.

The case was instituted in 2012 when Mizzi claimed that Cachia Caruana had exerted pressure to have the then-head of the security service removed. He also claimed that in 1998 when he was Minister, he was informed that a cocaine party was taking place on board a yacht and prominent figures “very, very close” friends of Cachia Caruana were on board.

Mizzi said that he had immediately the then police commissioner George Grech to check out the tip-off but officers went to the wrong yacht, implying that they had done so purposely under Cachia Caruana’s instructions.

Cachia Caruana forcefully rebutted allegations.

Libel proceedings were filed against Mizzi and Kurt Farrugia as former editor of One TV.

Mizzi himself testified in court about the call he had allegedly about the cocaine boat party. But he could not recall the name of the yacht which he had relayed to the police commissioner. Nor did he identify the person who had supplied him with the information.

As for Cachia Caruana’s alleged influence in respect of the head of the security service, Mizzi likewise refused to reveal his informant, explaining that it was “a person from the security service.”

The former minister argued that he had “not accused Cachia Caruana personally,” but had directed his accusations against the “system in place.”

Kurt Farrugia said he had nothing to do with what was stated by Mizzi in the interview, pointing out that Cachia Caruana had subsequently issued a reply that was published with prominence across all media.

Farrugia claimed that the libel was intended to “silence them” on this issue.

Magistrate Victor George Axiak said the interview was a matter of public interest, but that alone did not justify the respondents’ fair comment argument since the allegations to “pith and substance of the matter” were wrong.

With respect to the pressure allegedly exerted by Cachia Caruana to prevent then-acting head of security Herbert Agius from being promoted to head, Mizzi had expressed himself “in less dramatic” tone in court.

When testifying Mizzi said that Cachia Caruana had wished the security services to be led by the police commissioner. The court could hardly understand how Cachia Caruana could somehow be involved in such an important strategic decision, at a time when Labour was in government. 

Regarding the more serious allegation about the cocaine party, there was only one meaning which a person of ordinary intelligence could reasonably attribute to Mizzi’s words, namely that Cachia Caruana had allegedly exerted influence on the police to obstruct justice.

And that was to ensure that persons “very, very close” to him within drug circles were not caught.

Not only were such persons never identified but Mizzi had simply relied on information he got over the phone from someone he did not identify in his testimony and who might not have even had first-hand knowledge of the alleged facts.

A value judgment needed a “sufficient factual basis,” said the court, citing case law in this regard.

Although the television interview was a matter of public interest, the right to news was safeguarded only when matters concerning true facts were disclosed after “serious, diligent and thorough research.”

Mizzi made those allegations without the “slightest attempt to verify the facts” in spite of having had ample time to do so, said Magistrate Axiak, pointing out that 15 years had lapsed between his time as minister and the interview.

The publication had “smeared” Cachia Caruana in such manner as to tarnish his reputation.

Respondents had never tendered an apology, but rather held firm to the allegations throughout the years in court.

In light of all considerations the court declared Mizzi and Farrugia responsible for libel, awarding Cachia Caruana €1000 in damages.

The court also deemed appropriate to point out that judgment had taken so long because of a constitutional reference which was decided in 2018.

Meanwhile, parallel criminal proceedings for libel had been extinguished when such an offence was struck off the statute books.

Lawyer Joseph Zammit Maempel assisted the applicant.

Lawyer Pawlu Lia assisted the respondents.