Maltese man with two birthplaces fighting extradition request

A court will decide whether or not a man, whose extradition it is handling, is the right person, after it was noted that the European Arrest Warrant and the Schengen Alert system through which it was issued list two distant countries as his place of birth. 

Magistrate Aaron Bugeja is hearing the case for the extradition of Angelo Frank Paul Spiteri to Lithuania.

Spiteri is the subject of a European Arrest Warrant in that country, where he, along with two others is accused of setting up “Atostogu sandèlis” (which loosely translates to Holiday Warehouse) in Vilnius – a false company which would convince its victims to sign accommodation agreements with certain hotels and after signing and receiving payment for this, would deliberately not provide the service which he had received payment for.

Amongst other charges, Spiteri is also accused of conspiracy to commit fraud, using the cover of a legal entity to perform illegal activities, swindling, organising the manufacture of unlawful documents and forgery of company financial documents. The Lithuanian authorities claim that he absconded from the country in February this year, during the pre-trial investigations.

But Spiteri’s defence counsel, lawyers Dr. Jason Azzopardi, Dr. Patrick Valentino and Dr. Kris Busietta informed Magistrate Aaron Bugeja this morning that the defence “did not subscribe to the view that the warrant was issued validly.”

Azzopardi clarified that the defence was of the opinion that, while the warrant itself had been validly issued through the Schengen Information System (SIS II), the identification of the subject of the warrant had not been proven.

“The European Arrest Warrant and the SIS II specify two different places of birth: Malta and Australia,” said the lawyer. “Unless he has the gift of bilocation it would be highly unlikely that the person is the same. So we have a person born in Malta who is also allegedly born in Australia and according to other documentation, he is also Lithuanian. Three nationalities… a record!” quipped the lawyer.

The prosecution, police inspector Mario Cuschieri and Dr. Vincienne Vella from the Office of the Attorney General, pointed out that the photograph of the accused appeared on both of the documents. They requested permission, which the court granted, to request supplementary information from the Lithuanian authorities in relation to the issue, “given that the place of birth and nationality of the requested person mentioned in the alert did not tally with those mentioned in the EAW. “

Although the court acceded to this request, Magistrate Bugeja reminded the defence that the court was only obliged to ascertain the identity “on the balance of probability” and not “beyond reasonable doubt,” in such proceedings.

The magistrate gave the parties until the next sitting in January to present all the issues related to the case, after which he will decide on the matter of identification as well as whether or not to extradite the accused.