Constitutional Court rules Norman Lowell’s rights were ‘not violated’

A judgment handed by Judge Anthony Ellul who presided over the First Hall of the Civil Court under its Constitutional jurisdiction, ruled today that far-right firebrand Norman Lowell's human rights were not violated when he was interrogated by the police without the presence of a lawyer.

The Court said that Lowell's rights were not breached because his subsequent conviction for inciting racial hatred was never based on what he had told the police during interrogation.

Lowell had referred his case to the Constitutional Court, interrupting his hearing before the Court of Criminal Appeal where he is contesting his conviction by the Magistrates' Court which handed him a two-year jail term suspended for four years and a €500 fine.

He was found guilty of inciting racial hatred during two public assemblies he had organised in 2006.

Lowell had given two statements to the police when he was arrested, but was not assisted by a lawyer because the law in 2006 did not provide for this right. Lowell refused to sign his statements to the police, but the civil court that convicted him declared its ruling was not based on his statements to the police but on the transcripts of the words he used in his meetings.