Chamber of Advocates pushes for changes in court experts’ appointment

The Chamber of Advocates will be pushing for changes in methodology in how court experts are appointed.

The Chamber was reacting to statements delivered by Justice Minister Owen Bonnici, who yesterday urged members of the judiciary to make better use of court experts.

Bonnici also made reference to reports that court expert Martin Bajada was, 23 years ago, found guilty by a London court of theft and fraud. The Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court had found Bajada guilty of 10 counts of theft and was handed a two-year suspended sentence. Bajada, then still an employee at Air Malta, had also reportedly stolen €59,329.

Bonnici, whilst suggesting that members of the judiciary should avoid using Bajada for cases that may have been similar to his convictions, said that every one should be given a second chance if society truly believed in rehabilitation.

The Chamber, whilst insisting that its argument was not about an individual person, said that a set of criteria were required in the appointment of court experts.

Court experts are appointed by members of the judiciary to assist in an inquiry or the judicial process.

The lawyers said it agreed that a person is given the opportunity to rehabilitate and reintegrate within society, but this did not mean that “every individual who rehabilitates oneself should occupy such a role as a court expert”.

“The criteria for a court expert should be higher than a common citizen in every day’s life. Court experts are chosen by members of the judiciary when they feel that they cannot reach a conclusion on their own. It is evident that court experts enjoy the courts’ trust.”