A comparative analysis of the jurisdiction and powers of the courts of limited jurisdiction (criminal judicature) in different jurisdictions

Abstract

The Maltese legal system is known to be a mixed system, since it is based on the Civil Law structure with Common Law principles. These systems left an imprint on the present system; thus Malta adopted the best attributes of both. The Maltese judicial system is composed of two tiers; the Inferior and Superior Courts; but pertinent to this Thesis are the Inferior Courts. These Courts are competent to try and determine, summarily, offences of limited criminal jurisdiction. These are offences which are either punishable by a fine or else by a term of imprisonment that does not exceed a certain amount of years or months. Although an offence which is punishable up to twelve years imprisonment should not be deemed to be a minor offence, since the Constitution refers to the CoM as the inferior Courts, the author will refer to them as such throughout this Thesis. This study will examine in depth the criminal procedure within the criminal inferior Courts of various systems including Malta. A Criminal procedure includes the rules which administer the prosecution, adjudication and judgments. The aim is that the comparisons and contrasts between the systems analyzed will illustrate various alternate procedures which can be a model for a procedural reform in Malta. It will firstly analyze the legal development of the Maltese legal system from the French occupancy, throughout the British period and as it is at present. This will demonstrate the influences gained from both systems. Moreover, the judicial roles present within the inferior Courts will illustrate the various judicial bodies that are competent to determine minor offences. The difference between a Judge, Magistrate, Justice of the Peace will show that different modes of appointments and qualifications are required. The core of this Thesis is the jurisdiction and competence an inferior Court has. This study examines the nature of the cases the Courts are competent to determine, the investigation and prosecution procedures exercised; and ultimately the trial procedure in Court. Moreover, the competence to execute a judgment varies from one Court to another as well as from one system to another. The analysis done throughout will question whether Malta is to reform the criminal procedure in a holistic manner rather than piecemeal, towards more a Civil Law system. It also questions whether the implementation of various amendments will reduce the backlog of cases and render the criminal procedure a less complicated but more effective one.