Court rejects urgent libel hearing requests by Muscat, Mizzi and Schembri

The court has rejected the Prime Minister’s request to treat a libel case he instituted against Daphne Caruana Galizia, with urgency.

In a statement released through the Department of Information, the Office of the Prime Minister said that Joseph Muscat was disappointed by the court’s decision. “However, the Prime Minister respects the court’s decision and will continue to cooperate at all stages,” the OPM said.

“The Court, having seen the application, observes that this Court is already very busy, and there is no reason for this case to be given precedence over other cases before this court, which also are to be treated as important,” the court noted in its decision.

Muscat has sued Caruana Galizia for libel after she alleged that Panamanian company Egrant belonged to his wife, and that an account held by the offshore company received US$1.017 million from a Dubai-registered company, belonging to one of the daughters of the Azerbaijani President, Leyla Aliyeva.

The allegations are now subject to a magisterial inquiry.

The OPM said that “no one more than the Prime Minister and his family want the truth to out”.

Amid statements by Caruana Galizia that she’s refusing to appear before the inquiry, the OPM said that “democracy and the rule of law is to be observed by everyone.”

Magistrate Francesco Depasquale also rejected similar requests to treat the libel cases filed by Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi with urgency.

“The Court, having seen the application, observes that this Court is already has many commitments, and there is no reason for this case to be given precedence over other cases before this court, which also are to be treated as important.”

In all, a total of four decrees were handed down – one for the Prime Minister, another for Konrad Mizzi and two for Keith Schembri. An additional decree was handed down on April 18 in a second libel suit filed by Schembri. This second decree also turns down Schembri's request to appoint a judicial assistant.

"The court observes that this court must hear the case personally as it always does and the use of a judicial assistance as requested, is not opportune in this case because it is a measure employed only in exceptional circumstances!"

The court, however, authorised Schembri to present his evidence in its entirety, through affidavits where possible.