Update 3 | Appeals Court orders retrial of man convicted to 18 year jail term

Adds Court of Criminal Appeal's rejection of Attorney General's appeal on co-accused

Three judges presiding over the Criminal Courts of Appeal ordered that Panamanian national Josè Edgar Pena, who was sentenced to 18 years in jail and fined €20,000 for having conspired to traffic in cocaine, be released and face retrial, after it was established that jurors who decided his case were "misdirected."

Pena was found guilty in 2010 with six votes against three of conspiring to traffic in cocaine, while his co-accused, Panamian Domingo Navas, 33, was found unanimously not guilty by the jury.

Pena requested the Criminal Court of Appeal to revoke the jurors' verdict and acquit him of every guilt and the sentence, arguing that most of the evidence in the trial was based on hearsay.

The Court of Criminal Appeal was presided by Judges Raymond C. Pace, David Scicluna and Joseph Zammit McKeon upheld Pena's defence counsel's arguments that the jurors may have been misdirected by Mr. Justice Michael Mallia who presided over the trial, when addressing them before deliberation.

The Court of Criminal Appeal said that jurors may have been misdirected when the Judge told them how to interpret conspiracy and intent in such crimes.

The Court ruled that Pena's conviction had to be cancelled and the accused be re-tried.

It stated that the accused must be returned to the status of innocent until proven guilty, and ordered the Attorney General to re-issue a Bill of Indictment against Pena, who must be meanwhile released from jail and granted freedom pending his new trial. 

Lawyer Joe Brincat appeared for Jose Edgar Pena.

More trouble for Attorney General

Meanwhile the same the Court of Criminal Appeal has thrown out an appeal by the Attorney General regarding the acquittal of Pena's co-accused Riccardo Navas.

The Attorney General had argued that the presiding Judge had shown a 'bias' during his address to jurors when addressing them before deliberating their verdict on charges related to money laundering of cocaine trafficking proceeds.

In its judgment the Court of Criminal Appeal stressed that there was "absolutely nothing to censure the presidning judge" adding that there was no bias in favour of the defence counsel.