https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/1915 2026-04-04T18:53:14Z 2026-04-04T18:53:14Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/2174 2018-06-14T10:26:48Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Public order in sports events in Malta and relevant countries Abstract: Throughout this work an examination of the most important factors that contribute to the prompting of violence and disasters in sports events were evaluated. In pursuit of determining these factors, the major disasters which occurred through the years were examined in detail, defining the common factors which contributed to these tragedies. The significance of reports which followed these happenings is highlighted and described, focusing also on the action taken by the relative authorities in response to these reports. The regulatory system in effect in the United Kingdom, which indeed serves as prototype to practically all the world, was analyzed and a comparison was made with the model adopted by other countries primarily Italy. The choice of this country was based on the fact that Malta is very much influenced by the Italian culture and thus, there is a certain degree of resemblance in the procedures adopted by Malta and Italy. Paramount importance was given to the analysis of the Maltese legislation, namely the Maintenance of Public Order at Sports Grounds Regulations, Subsidiary Legislation 10.33, stressing its lacunas in view of pointing out what actions need to be taken by the Maltese authorities. Very recent incidents in the Maltese scenario were also examined, highlighting the deficiencies in the Maltese model and supporting the view that action by the Maltese authorities needs to be taken both strongly and promptly. Finally, a Legal Notice with all the purported necessary amendments is drafted, for the purpose of reviewing old regulations, whilst new ones are suggested, in the light of future legislation. Description: LL.D.

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/2173 2018-07-10T08:24:19Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: Dispute resolution under the condominium act with particular emphasis on the constitutionality of mandatory arbitration Abstract: Whereas arbitration has been traditionally understood to be a form of dispute resolution chosen voluntarily, as an alternative to court litigation, by the parties involved in a dispute, the spread of mandatory arbitration may have not only challenged but even reshaped this idea. Such a phenomenon entails the imposition of arbitration on the parties, thus excluding the possibility of taking the dispute to court. Naturally enough, this seems to contradict the nature of the institute itself, as the latter was primarily conceived as a way of giving the parties a choice. Locally, mandatory arbitration has left its mark on a number of sectors. One of these is the law of condominia, particularly the sphere of condominium disputes. The Condominium Act states that where it is so stipulated in the Act, the parties to a condominium dispute are deemed to have agreed to refer the matter to arbitration. This thesis explores the various types of disputes within a condominium and the different outlooks on the mandatory referral to arbitration. In this respect, significant results were attained thanks to interviews that were held with the Registrar of the Malta Arbitration Centre, condominium administrators as well as the director of a condominium administration company. Additionally, a survey was also conducted among a group of condomini. More importantly, our Constitution and the European Convention of Human Rights provide for the right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial adjudicating authority. Through the study of local judgments, this thesis examines whether or not the arbitral tribunal, as incorporated within the scope of mandatory arbitration, offers sufficient guarantees in order to ensure that this fundamental human right is protected. Ultimately, even though the courts have not always adopted this line of thought, the conclusion is that mandatory arbitration does not appear to be unconstitutional. Description: LL.D.

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/2168 2018-06-14T07:31:35Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: The doctrines of collective and individual ministerial responsibility revisited Abstract: On obtaining Independence, Malta adopted the Westminster system of government and, therefore, the constitutional conventions of collective and individual ministerial responsibility. This thesis seeks to discuss and analyse the subject matter of the conventions, their application and who applies them. It seeks to contribute to the discussion on ministerial responsibility and to suggest constitutional amendments to strengthen the conventions and the Constitution. The author has consulted books on British and Maltese constitutional law, the Constitution of Malta, parliamentary debates of the House of Commons and the House of Representatives, research papers, newspapers and websites. The first chapter deals with the nature of the conventions and the Executive, the origins of the British and Maltese Cabinets and the functions of the Cabinet. It is argued that since Cabinet emerges from Parliament, ministers remain collectively and individually responsible to Parliament. The second chapter analyses the convention of collective ministerial responsibility, through which Cabinet is made collectively responsible to Parliament for the general conduct of the affairs of the country. The third chapter deals with the convention of individual ministerial responsibility, which provides that a minister is responsible to Parliament for his own official acts and for those of the ministry entrusted to him by the Prime Minister. The fourth chapter examines the application of the conventions in Malta by analysing primary examples of their application. The thesis concludes that the conventions are applied by the Prime Minister provided he enjoys the confidence of the absolute majority of the members of the House of Representatives. Together with his power to advise the President to dissolve Parliament, the Prime Minister uses the conventions to control the majority in Parliament, including Government backbenchers. Adherence to these conventions ensures a true democracy in which government Ministers would, through Parliament, be responsible to the electorate. Description: LL.D.

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/2153 2019-02-22T12:45:56Z 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z

Title: The independence and impartiality of non-judicial defenders of human rights in Malta : time we questioned it! Abstract: According to Chief Justice Emeritus Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici, as a fresh lawyer stepping inside the Law Courts “one comes to realise that all substantive rights are only effective in as much as adjectival or procedural rights make them so”. The right to a fair trial, being procedural in nature, secures the enjoyment of the substantive right. The notions of independence and impartiality are at the heart of any legal system and embedded in all major international human rights instruments to the extent that the requirement of independence and impartiality in the administration of justice constitutes a fundamental right in itself. The culmination of the rule of law finds ground in securing justice. However, despite the fact that nobody contests the premise that the independence and impartiality of the judiciary is one of the main characteristics of a democratic society, the inherent aspect of the separation of powers is still at stake with regard to many of the non-judicial defenders of human rights in Malta. Non-judicial human rights defenders play a leading role in human rights promotion. An examination of their legislation shows that they also provide alternative means to resolving disputes thus partaking in the holistic system of justice. Though redress is generally achieved through the actions of the courts and administrative tribunals, one must not overlook the role of the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the various other Commissioners scattered amongst our legislation. Despite being primary defenders in ensuring a safe ground for enforcing a human rights culture, alas their independence and impartiality remains questionable Description: LL.D.

2014-01-01T00:00:00Z