Court declares lack of legal aid in interrogations breach of fair trial in Nigerian drug case Helena Grech
A Constitutional Court has upheld a Nigerian man’s plea that his right to a fair trial had been breached when he was interrogated without legal aid, but no remedy was required as the outcome would not have changed.
Nigerian John Udagha Omeh, 42, was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment and fined a total of €70,000 in 2010, which if not paid would result in a further two years in prison, after he tried to import over three kilogrammes of cocaine in Malta on 9 December 2007. This was later confirmed on appeal.
The Courts also held that this declaration (breach of right to a fair trial) was remedy enough, in view of the fact that his sentence would not have been changed had he been given access to a legal aid throughout interrogations.
This was based on the fact that the statement he voluntarily and “spontaneously”, according to the court judgement, delivered to the police was not called into question at any point by the accused, and that he had not changed his version of events from what he divulged in interrogations to what he testified in court.
The cocaine is valued at around €229,000. Testifying yesterday, pharmacist Mario Mifsud estimated the cocaine to be approximately 61.2 per cent pure.
Through legal representation, Mr Udagha Omeh claimed that a number of rights had been breached such as the AG’s discretion to decide whether he would be tried before a Court of Magistrates or indicted before a jury, that the availability for legal aid in Malta was limited and therefore inadequate and that he was not given a right to legal aid throughout interrogations, among others.
The Attorney General put forward a number of arguments refuting the majority of Mr Udagha Omeh’s claims. In relation to the assertion that his right to affair trial was breached due to the legal aid provided, the Attorney General noted that: “In fact, nowhere in the constitutional application is the applicant alleging that he was poorly assisted,” the Attorney General had observed.
Jurors had found Mr Omeh guilty on all three charges brought against him in 2010, saying they found Mr Omeh guilty for conspiracy, importation and being in possession of the cocaine.
Upon returning to deliver the final judgement on the case, the judge said that he took into consideration legal aid Malcolm Mifsud’s requests relating to the accused’s good behaviour in prison and his assistance with police investigations, before adding that the punishment handed down should reflect the gravity of the case.
Mr Justice Galea Debono added that had Mr Omeh got off scotfree, this would have led to severe devastating consequences on Malta’s society. Furthermore, Mr Omeh tried to bring in one of the largest ever consignments of drugs in Malta.
As a result, he had no option but to sentence the accused to 20 years imprisonment.
Mr Omeh was caught and arrested in 2007 while trying to import over three kilogrammes of cocaine. Liaising with customs officials on duty at the Malta International Airport (MIA) on the day, police ordered Mr Omeh to open two luggage cases which he brought with him on a flight from Tripoli in Libya.
After breaking both padlocks of the luggage cases, the police discovered that one luggage was full to the brim with clothes, while the other luggage case contained a number of small garments. However, further investigations revealed that there were two sachets full of white powder hidden in the side compartment of the latter bag.
Mr Omeh had claimed at the time that the other luggage case was given to him by a friend just minutes before boarding the plane and he had no knowledge whatsoever that the case contained drugs. While saying that he was only attempting to do this friend a favour at the time, Mr Omeh added that his visit to Malta was merely ‘business’ related.