Anglu and Audrey
Yesterday was a day in the sign of bias. I got an early taste of what was to be when I skimmed through the Times while waiting for my meeting with dentist and anaesthetist at the crack of dawn in hospital. The right side of the paper was dominated by the headline of Anglu Farrugia’s allegations with regards to Magistrate Audrey Demicoli and a case of hers that was overturned on Appeal. Farrugia must be feeling in seventh heaven what with the fact that this case seems to vindicate on paper his allegations of “thousands of rigged votes”. Until the original case (that had dismissed the allegations) was overturned by Michael Mallia on appeal, Farrugia had turned into an object of ridicule (remember Simon telling him “u harguk ta’ hmar”? The joke’s on Simon now I guess.
But back to the case itself and the not too subtle accusations of bias that Farrugia directed at Magistrate Demicoli. Subtlety was never part of Anglu’s repertoire (having watched his performance on Xarabank you really have to ask where his forte truly lies in any case). In formulating his tirade against Magistrate Demicoli Anglu Farrugia left little space for imagination as to who he was referring to. Demicoli was guilty, according to Farrugia, of being her father’s daughter – and that his having militated in the PN in the seventies and eighties must have surely affected her judgement in a case where a private entrepreneur was accused of bullying his employees as to when and how to vote.
Let us begin by pointing out the obvious – that the last thing the judiciary needs at the moment is a tirade of politically motivated accusations, particularly when this comes from one of the (admittedly lesser) papabili for the post of justice minister in a future labour government. Judgements in the Magistrates’ courts are regularly overturned on appeal. What is important in this (and other cases) is to note the reasoning at the two levels of decision. What we had here was a disagreement between the Magistrate’s court and that of Appeal on the conclusions to be reached based on the facts before them. No big deal. I see numerous cases get overturned on review at the European Court too – it’s the point of having a possibility of review is it not?
The main point here is that the judgement at each level of the courts was made on merit and that the accusations of bias by Anglu Farrugia are gratuitous, frivolous and self-serving to say the least. What they tell me about this aspirant Justice Minister is that he has no qualms to denigrate and throw mud on a judiciary that is in trouble if he believes that it serves his political needs. I say “he believes” because I still cannot see how in Anglu Farrugia’s obfuscated (a word some trolls love to use) way of thinking – a condemnation of a private individual for bullying his employees into voting can actually be seen as directly linked to the need for a minister to resign.
Bias? In this case the only bias is in Anglu’s mind. The silence coming from his own party on this very issue should speak volumes to the man who thinks that Colombia is an African Nation and who needs to produce a bar chart to explain an increase in tax. That’s two numbers Anglu – no need for a chart.
Well done to Magistrate Demicoli for her replies to the press. “No comment. There is a code of ethics that precludes me from replying otherwise”. Finally some good, common sense.
