Government insists shelving of impeachment motion is ‘correct’

Government justified its position on the impeachment motion on Judge Lino Farrugia Sacco, insisting that it was the "correct and right" decision.

Moreover it called on the opposition to show "maturity" in such an institutional process and refrain from turning the matter into a "political football."

Yesterday, during a House Business Committee meeting, deputy prime minister Louis Grech argued that the Parliamntiary motion should be shelved until the Constitutional court decides over the judicial protest filed by Farrugia Sacco against the prime minister, the attorney general and the commission for the administration of justice.

Despite the Nationalist Party's opposition, the House Business Committee decided that Parliament should endorse the government's proposal, effectively postponing the vote on the motion by a few more weeks.

Opposition deputy leader Mario de Marco insisted that the case should not be frozen as it could set a dangerous precedent.

Farrugia Sacco, who retires in August, filed a judicial protest, claiming that he was not being given a fair trial following government's decision to move a new impeachment motion without a fresh investigation by the commission for the administration of justice.

The judge claims a second decision by the CAJ, reconfirming its original decision in January without holding a second set of hearings on the new impeachment against the judge filed by the Prime Minister, breaches his constitutional rights.

The new motion was filed after the original motion was declared to be invalid in the new legislature when former prime minister Lawrence Gonzi resigned his seat in the House.

In a statement issued late last night, government reiterated that Parliament held the "powers" to proceed with the impeachment motion, and denied that its decision to shelve the motion would set a dangerous precedent limiting the House's powers in impeachment cases.

However, government added, prudence comes above "political and partisan considerations," in all cases involving anyone who claims that his fundamental rights are being breached.

It added that judge emeritus Giovanni Bonello and the dean of the faculty of law Kevin Aquilina publicly declared that Parliament should only go ahead with the motion once the Constitutional court decides on the case, which government said should "be concluded reasonably shortly, as determined by the country's laws."