Your reasoning is flawed too.

The law was passed in 2002. The ECHR judgement which brought about this whole mess (Salduz vs Turkey) was handed down in 2005, three years later. It’s also good to note that France actually introduced the right to speak to a lawyer before interrogation AFTER Malta din.

So far no “convicted criminals” have been released, let alone mass released. There were no cases which were overturned on appeal because of this issue.

The few who have benefited from it are those who were arraigned in cases where the only proof against them was their signed declaration. Furthermore there has been no general direction from the Constitutional Court on whether a Court should disregard any such declarations. Every case has to be assessed on its own merits. Because of this, there were less than a handful of cases which were thrown out and the defendent found not guilty.

Overall, one can say that this matter has been blown completely out of proportion.

Which means that Dr. Debono has a conflict of interest when he promotes the reforms that he claims in favour of those accused of crime.

[Daphne – The prime minister does not give instructions to the media. His own party media, perhaps – but certainly not those who are not party employees. This is the Nationalist Party we are talking about – it understands free speech and democracy. With the Labour Party and its supporters, I can understand that there is more difficulty understanding this simple concept. Please read my latest post – that is, if you can.]

The problem with our laws today is not that they’re archaic but it’s because people like Franco Debono think they know the law when in fact they know precious nothing.

We cannot play with the law, patch it up and then expect it to work.

Besides, where was Franco Debono when the COCP was being butchered?

Laws are being amended without heed being taken of all the different laws which depend on one particular law. I am trying not to be too technical but how on earth can a 37-year old (I’m 34) be expected to be taken seriously when he is trying to change the codes which have been created over a period of 200 years?

How can Franco Debono, with one sweep of the hand, remove all the learned experience of jurists like Mamo, Antolisei and others, including English jurists, when he himself is not listening to all these learned jurists?

Any lawyer worth his salt knows that playing about with the laws is as dangerous and as pernicious as leaving dead letters in them. However, you cannot just amend to your heart’s content without taking heed of the circumstances.

[Daphne – Please, Katrin, I know you know Malta very well. Do you imagine it’s possible for 12,000 US soldiers to be hiding here undetected? They couldn’t even arrive undetected, let alone be housed undetected or move around undetected.]

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/en/newsdetails/news/national/68-illegal-immigrants-escorted-to-Maltese-shores-20120115

“Posted by: Cikku il Poplu— 15/01/2012 14:53:44

Dawn jonqosna, ahna qeghdin sew kif ahna, sakemm mhux xi bdil ta strategija biex nkomplu nhambqu li ma m`ghandux jkolna elezzjoni ghalissa. “

Grand article.

Proset and keep it up.

Before I read it, I thought that I was the only one to feel that Jean Pierre Farrugia was out of place in that list of cads gratuitously provided by the tooth-fairy. As far as I know, Farrugia was the only one of “the rebels” who refused categorically a promotion to shut him up when he conveyed in his own inimicable and forthright fashion his constutuents’ concerns.