Advocates' chamber insists commission heads must be 'mature, legally competent'

The Chamber of Advocates has called for a reform of commissions, public boards and government bodies, insisting that they must be composed of “mature” people with a certain degree of legal know-how.

“No board or commission should have the power to ignore legal arguments on the basis that such arguments should be reserved for the courts,” the Chamber said in a statement. “The law is the only objective criterion on which a quasi-judicial body should base its decisions.”

The Chamber was reacting to the Planning Commission chairperson’s recent dismissal of a lawyer’s argument by accusing him of “showing off with the law”.

“You are not in a court of law; this is a planning commission,” Elizabeth Ellul had told lawyer Massimo Vella during a recent hearing on whether two Msida townhouses should be demolished.

The Chamber of Advocates accused Ellul of acting aggressively and of lacking maturity.

“No lawyer should be attacked for raising legal arguments in a procedures in which he is assisting a client,” it said. “That is a lawyer’s professional duty and any attempt to hinder him from carrying out his duties is nothing less than a rampant breach of the basic principles of a fair fairing.

“If the person judging the case doesn’t feel competent to listen to and evaluate legal arguments, then they must either be replaced by a more competent person or receive the necessary assistance.

It added that it has received similar reports from lawyers who have been similarly hindered from carrying out their professional duties, as Vella had.

“It is unfortunate that, in 2016, we have to explain such fundamental principles to our country’s rule of law culture. However, these principles are being ignored by [people in charge of boards] due to their lack of understanding of basic legal principles or perhaps because of mere arrogance.”