A London-based lawyer for Yorgen Fenech has reacted publicly to a letter by Council of Europe rule-of-law rapporteur Pieter Omtzigt three days ago, saying he is shifting the narrative and lacking consideration for fairness of trial.
In that letter, the Dutch MP, as rapporteur on the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia and the rule of law in Malta, had dismissed complaints by Fenech’s defence team that he had willfully ignored their fair trial concerns.
Addressing lawyer Wayne Jordash, Omtzigt said he was “labouring under a fundamental misunderstanding of my function as an international oversight mechanism".
But Jordash has hit back, claiming that his several requests for assistance had been misrepresented by the rapporteur who had also failed to address “the most vital fair trial and rule of law issues” at stake.
Replying in November to another letter by Jordash in May, Omtzigt had explained that he could not respond since the case was still sub-judice.
But Jordash said that after his second letter Omtzigt had said that the defence’s requests fell “outside the exercise of [Omtzigt’s] mandate,” terming this as a “shifting narrative.”
Under such “curious interpretation” of the rapporteur’s mandate, there seemed to be no consideration for “fairness of trial, at least for Mr Fenech.”
Omtzigt’s letter of December 12 as well as his report, did not manifest “even handedness or respect for the accused’s fundamental rights,” he said.
Jordash also questioned Omtzigt’s “attack on the integrity” of Charles Mercieca, a member of Fenech’s defence team. In his report he failed to state that the former lawyer in the Attorney General's office had been cleared of all wrongdoing following an inquiry prompted by his switch to the defence team.
Omtzigt’s report had also failed to record the version supplied by Fenech’s other defence lawyer, Gianluca Caruana Curran, in respect of an incident concerning [Times of Malta] journalist, Ivan Martin.
That report was “replete with damaging omissions and inaccuracies,” such as failure to record that Fenech “categorically denied any involvement in the Caruana Galizia crime,” as well as “in the plot.”
Nor did the report state that Fenech denied “ever planning to escape from Malta,” and had “no reason to hide.”
Stating that he was “a little confused” about Omtzigt’s mandate, the London lawyer said he expected the rapporteur to restrain “from attacking” members of the defence team “without cogent reason” and to present “an accurate, impartial and measured” view of the defence.
Instead Omtzigt appeared to have “donned the mantle of a prosecutor or a judge,” Jordash wrote.