Questionnaire Malta
I.20 What are the main simplified procedures?
The original competence of the Court of Magistrates
as a Court of Criminal Judicature, as established in sect. 370(1) CC,
appertains only to decide cases dealing with all contraventions (minor
offences) established in the Criminal Code, all crimes provided for in the
Criminal Code (but whose penalty is that either afforded to contraventions in
the Code, or a fine, or imprisonment for a period not longer than six months
coupled with or without the payment of a fine or interdiction), and all those
other crimes and contraventions created by other laws but whose punishment is
that afforded immediately prior unless the special law provides otherwise. The
simplified procedure, known as summary proceedings, arises out of sect. 370(4) CC,
whereby if the charges filed against an individual are liable to imprisonment
for more than six months but less than four years, the Court is obliged to ask
the person so charged, during the questioning, without oath of the same person
charged, whether such person objects to his case being heard summarily. In the
eventuality that the person so charged does not object to his case being tried
summarily, then the Court asks the prosecuting officer, whether the Attorney
General objects to this particular case being heard so. Should the Attorney
General agree, then the Court of Magistrates who until that time was a Court of
Criminal Inquiry transforms itself into a Court of Criminal Judicature competent
to hear all evidence and decide the case itself instead of having the case
being referred to the Criminal Court upon an indictment filed against the
offender by the Attorney General. This procedure is widely used on a very
regular basis. Summary proceedings tend to be more expedient and more cost
effective for all parties involved, i.e. the Court, the prosecution (in this
instance carried out by the Commissioner of police and not the Attorney
General) and also the defence. Nonetheless, cases do arise whereby the Attorney
General refuses to give his consent for a case to be heard summarily although
the person so charged has accepted his case to be so tried. Reasons spurring
the Attorney General to such a decision depend primarily on the public alarm
raised by either the person charged such as, for instance in the cases of high
ranking public officers being charged with having committed/omitted a crime in
the performance of their functions or the actual crime or both. However, if the
police, who prosecute before the Inferior Courts choose not to ask the Attorney
General for his consent then the decision is taken by then by default.
