No More Mandatory Juries For Traffickers: A Look At Malta’s New Proposed Drug Reform
A proposed update to Malta’s drug laws will remove the legal requirement for people charged with drug trafficking to face a trial by jury.
As it stands, crimes that carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment must be tried by jury. Although drug trafficking falls under this category, no one has ever been sentenced to life for drug crimes.
Yet such cases are clogging up Malta’s courts, with a TVM analysis last year finding that over half of the 110 pending trials are related to trafficking. This clogging effectively means that juries for serious crimes such as murder often take several years to start, delaying justice for victims and the nation.
While the proposed reform won’t change the punishment levels for drug trafficking, it will allow the accused to opt to be tried by a judge instead of by a jury, similar to cases of rape and sexual crimes.
This is one of several proposed changes that are up for public consultation until 9th February. Here are the others:
1. The Drug Rehabilitation Board will increase from four to seven people, with an established quorum of four people who must be present for meetings to take place. This is intended to prevent situations arising where meetings must be postponed because a member or a few members are absent.
2. As it stands, a magistrate can order that certain drug-related cases be tried in front of a ‘Drugs Court’, which focuses more on rehabilitation than punishment. Cases must satisfy certain criteria, including that the crime must be “substantially attributable” to personal drug use. A new amendment will clarify that the crime must have also been committed during a period in which the accused was dependent on drugs.
3. As it stands, a magistrate cannot summon a Drugs Court if the crime included a voluntary offence against an individual or if the accused was in possession of a firearm or explosives. These restrictions will now be scrapped to allow the magistrate more leeway to make a decision based on the circumstances of the case.
4. Decisions taken by the Drug Rehabilitation Board on the progress made by the accused during the rehabilitation process must be substantiated and not simply consist of a report with a positive or negative conclusion. This is intended to give the courts full visibility of the specific case before delivering a sentence.
5. As it stands, once a magistrate overseeing a Drugs Court is satisfied that an accused person has been rehabilitated, they are empowered to summon all related criminal cases involving that person and rule on them. However, this discretion wasn’t exercised in practice and there were concerns that it risked burdening the magistrate with too much work, at the expense of all their other cases. This discretion will therefore be scrapped and the magistrate will instead be able to communicate their rehabilitation findings to other courts listening to cases involving the accused for them to take into consideration.
6. Former prisoners who were caught with drugs while in prison but who have since served their sentence an rehabilitated themselves will be eligible to be tried by a Drugs Court. This is intended to prevent former inmates who have successfully rehabilitated themselves from automatically returning to prison.
7. The maximum amount of drugs a person can be found with to be judged by a magistrate, rather than a jury, has increased – from 300g to 500g of cannabis, from 300 to 500 ecstasy pills, and from 100g to 200g of heroin or cocaine. While they will be eligible to apply for a Drugs Court hearing, they must still meet all the criteria, including that the drugs were for their personal possession. This means the accused must convince the police that the drugs were for their own personal use, and not for trafficking purposes.
The reforms are intended to free up the courts’ jury resources, allowing them to prioritise more serious cases, and to give them more leeway when ruling on cases involving drug possession.
They must still pass through the public consultation stage, Cabinet and Parliament, which means there could be some substantial changes to the final law.
And as with all previous drug reforms, it is likely to be controversial. Criminal lawyer and former PN MP Jason Azzopardi has come out strongly against them and warned the reforms should strike fear into the hearts of parents across the island.
“The government is proposing that people caught with up to 500 ecstasy pills and 200g of cocaine or heroin will be able to claim that the drugs were for their personal use and therefore avoid jail time,” Azzopardi said.
“Do you know what we’re talking about when we speak about such numbers? The government is passing this law for the benefit of drug wholesalers. It isn’t a law for ‘simple’ party pushes but for large drug agents.”
“Do you know of anyone who has 500 ecstasy pills or 200g of cocaine for their personal use and not for trafficking purposes? For argument’s sake, imagine a person consumes 10 ecstasy pills – even five is a lot – in a single night. Jonathan Attard wants you to believe that he is passing this law for people who attend 50 parties and take 10 ecstasy pills at each one.”
“The government is immoral, has no scruples and is heartless. Pigs. They want to alienate the people from what’s coming up by creating this diversion, so that people speak about this obscenity that will allow drug importers to profit off people at the bottom.”
What do you make of this proposed reform?
READ NEXT: How Robert Abela’s Cabinet Reshuffle Compares To PN’s Last One
