Lengthy criminal proceedings and the right to a fair trial : opposite sides to the same coin?

Abstract

This research analysis provides insight into the occasional procedural deficiencies in the Maltese Criminal Procedural system, which deficiencies collectively attribute towards a breach of the right to a fair trial within a reasonable time as outlined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 39 of the Constitution of Malta. Lacuna in the law along with malpractice, place the accused at a disadvantage when he is charged, and the proceedings are prolonged indefinitely. While the accused can be found responsible of procedural delays, the main causes are the unlimited discretion given to the prosecution in various shapes and forms as well as the court’s inertia and inability to take charge to establish timeframes for the conclusion of evidence. This is documented in line with the European Court of Human Rights’ considerations. While uncovering such realities, this study unravels a two-fold problem, whereby it not only discovers the procedural loopholes and provides for their solution, but it also challenges the access to constitutional redress as well as the Constitutional Court’s remedies parallel to the ramifications of the delay in question. This is analysed in line with Article 13 of the European Convention on Human rights in order to assess whether the accused who is thereby claiming victim status due to his breach of his right to a fair trial has truly obtained a restitutio in integrum. Ultimately, the end result of this study envisages the possibility of viable solutions, elaborated upon in the final chapter.