This article by Leighton John DeMicoli was previously submitted as
part of LHM1014 and is being published with the author’s permission.
It examines policing in Malta before 1814, when law enforcement
powers were fragmented among various officials, often leading to
conflicts. Proclamation XXII of 1814, promulgated by Governor
Thomas Maitland, introduced a structured police force, addressing
these inefficiencies and laying the foundation for modern policing in
Malta. Beyond law enforcement, the Proclamation also served as a
catalyst for broader legal reforms, reinforcing judicial independence
and the presumption of innocence – principles that would later shape
the Maltese Criminal Code.
Leighton John DeMicoli, ‘Proclamation XXII of 1814: Maitland’s Blueprint for Police Reform in Malta and Its Lasting Impact on Maltese Criminal Law’ (Online Law Journal, 22 February 2025).
Broadly speaking, the police are the civil force of a democratic state – a structured body of men and women who take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution. Thus these uniformed officers’ duty is not only to maintain public order but they are also responsible for the enforcement of the law.
For many centuries, the Maltese Islands had organised groups of men, authorised to perform the services of public safety, crime prevention, and detection even though most likely these were of a neighbourhood watch type. The earliest references go way back to the times of the Arab occupation (870 AD). In the Middle Ages the keeper of the castle, the ‘Castellano’ held jurisdiction over the three cities. The appointed person to assume charge of the ‘żbirri’ in the Aragonese era was the ‘Capitano della Verga’ or Captain of the Rod followed by the ‘Gran Visconte’ with the advent of the Knights. With regard to legislation it was a Grandmaster from the Knights epoch who embarked on the first legislative codification of laws that had to be observed. Before the ‘Code de Rohan’ (which resembled the old Roman law) the laws enforced, whether Civil or Criminal, were mainly based on Sicilian and Roman Law. During the brief stay of the French, no significant changes in the police role occurred but the French interlude brought about what is known as the ‘Code Civil des Français’ or ‘Code Napoleon’ which replaced archaic practices. Codified in 1804 this legal system repopularised the Roman concepts of law once again. However, all French Laws and decrees were perceived to be null as understood in the case of Depiro vs Grech Delicata “per difetto di potere” by his Majesty’s Court of Appeal which was chaired by the then Chief Justice Sir Adrian Dingli and dated 7th of January 1885.1 The really significant changes and organisation of the Maltese police came about when Malta was a British Crown colony and in point of fact the Maltese Police Force was set up from a proclamation way back in 1814.2
There is some disagreement about the founding date of the Malta Police Force. Vincenzo Azopardi, writing in 1843 provides records and supporting documentation which proves that Civil Commissioner Hildebrand Oakes tried to reform the police structures and established the ‘Magistracy of Police’ in 1812 (PS/01/04: 1/3/1813).3 It is, however, doubtful whether these reforms were successful and hence it is to be emphasised that Proclamation XXII of 1814 is to be regarded as the foundation date of our Police Force.
The first British Governor to be appointed for the Maltese Islands was the eccentric Sir Thomas Maitland. ‘King Tom’ as he was affectionately known since he appeared imperious, arrived in Malta in October of 1813. At that time the islands were disastrously suffering an outbreak of the bubonic plague and upon arrival, Maitland enforced stricter but sensible quarantine measures including the fencing of entire hamlets to prevent inhabitants from leaving. He ordered the publication of immediate rules that had to be observed and adhered to by the police to contain the disease from spreading inland. This surprising historical fact that the so called ‘plague police’ struggled to control the spread of the epidemic through isolation a number of years earlier than the founding of the London Metropolitan Police Force makes our highly respected Corps one of the oldest police forces in Europe!
Eventually, Maitland clearly stood out in a time of turmoil and was seen by many to be an excellent legislator and statesman. Although absent from Malta for long periods of time he still embarked on measures to remove outdated practices and laws which were found to be defective and at times objectionable. When the pandemic was finally over, he dealt with setting up the police force and enacting legislative reforms to the Judicial system by issuing Proclamation XXII.
Regarding the police force, this was organised on the English model. Proclamation XXII decreed that the police were to be split into two distinctive departments. These were to be identified as the executive and the judicial. This separation of the executive from the judicial ensured that each sector would function so as to stop the other from abusing its authority. The executive duties were those once exercised by the Castellan. An Inspector- General was to be the head of the executive police whilst the judicial had to be administered by the Magistrates for Malta and the Magistrates of police for the sister island applicable as from the 12th of July 1814. The first commandant of the executive police, once exercised by the Castellan, held the rank of Inspector-General. His name was Francesco Rivarola. Count Rivarola was a Corsican who served in the Napoleonic Wars and who swore allegiance to the British. As Chief of Police, Rivarola was authorised to deliver orders as considered necessary in the particular context of each case. However, he was directly answerable to Maitland. Subsequently, after the granting of a responsible government in 1921, the police department became the responsibility of the Maltese administration. The Maltese lawyer and politician Count Alfredo Caruana Gatto was the first appointed Minister responsible for Justice and the police.4
As regards the Judicial system which helped in no small way in the restructuring of policing in Malta, what was known as the ‘Magna Curia Castellania’ or the law courts and prison in Valletta was split into the Criminal Court and the Civil Court.5 Governor Maitland abolished the ‘Corte Capitanale’ of the old city and concentrated on the ‘Castellania’. The ‘Consolato del Mare’ which had originated in 1697 was substituted by a Commercial Court. Trial by jury was not recommended except in the commercial court. The Court of Appeal included a hall for commercial and another for civil cases. The Governor with the expertise of two judges functioned as the Supreme Court which had to deal with any exceptional cases which might arise. The Italian language was decreed to be the official language of the court and hence pleadings and judgments had to be delivered in Italian too. Once in office, Judges could not privately work as Lawyers. Their income from judicial fees was also amended in view of the fact that the system encouraged corruption and bribery. Magistrates were given the authority to allow persons on bail. The principle of ‘il precetto notturno’ in that those under investigation were not allowed to go out at nightfall however applied for a period which did not exceed six months under a penalty in case of infringement. A separate sensible system was reserved for juveniles under seventeen years of age. At the end of the day the Judge’s duty was “merely to execute the law, be it good, bad or indifferent but he cannot go out of the law”.6
The Court’s judgments were final so the Governor could not adjust and reverse sentences once decided by the same court or tribunal thus, finally, putting an abrupt end to the Code of Grandmaster Rohan where no limitation was put to the powers of the Grandmasters. If there were sufficient grounds, an appeal might be brought before the Supreme Court for their final judgment. The purpose of the reforms was to tackle several other issues albeit very few changes were made to the Criminal Code of 1784. The police were vested with the power to detain individuals, nevertheless the legislation made it impossible for either the police or a court to detain a prisoner without charges for any duration of time. When people were taken into custody, they had to be accused within forty-eight hours or else be freed pending further investigations. Ultimately, the presumption of innocence of the accused applied. Indisputably, no one could be arrested without accusation. More to the point, police magistrates had merely ten days to scrutinise suspects and to bring the indicted to court. The police were also empowered to conduct searches in private property however every confiscated item had to be numbered and signalled in front of a witness so as to avoid abuses. Additionally, a statement had then to be presented to the Inspector-General.
Furthermore, cases or trials were to be heard in an open court accessible to the general public. In 1814 Maitland issued a ‘Constitution of Criminal Court’ and indeed the first article read that all forms of torture were to be completely banned in the Maltese Islands.7 To help facilitate the upkeep of both law and order, the Maltese Islands were divided into six Districts. However, the police were still engaged in a number of subsidiary duties which hindered their functions of enforcing the law and preventing crimes. These included, but were not limited to cleansing the streets, selling postage stamps and handling both incoming and outgoing mail from police stations.8
Maitland’s Proclamation XXII also made it completely evident that the Maltese police force had to be a civil and not a military one. Perhaps this was the reason behind the fact that the first members did not have a uniform though they were issued and allowed to carry a hanging sword, a pistol as well as a baton as a sign of office. It is pertinent to point out here that the police powers to arrest were hindered by the right of sanctuary, that is, if the suspect or outlaw found refuge within the precincts of a parish church and elsewhere and whenever the Blessed Sacrament was exposed. Then, it was up to the Ecclesiastical authority to decide whether one was entitled to such a privilege. Hence, although revoked as early as 1777 the ‘Non Gode l’immunita Ecclesias’ dragged on until it was eventually abolished in 1828. It should be noted here that Maitland tried to put in vigore ‘Mortmain Law’ to reduce the power of the church but the British did not dare to interfere with matters related to the Roman Catholic Religion practised in Malta. This effectively meant that with the priviligium fori the suspect might end being questioned at the Bishop’s court in addition to having the right of appeal to Rome.
Although Maitland was seen as despotic, his reform of policing and the Maltese Criminal law was a complete overhaul with promising prospects. The legal elements that proclamation XXII introduced enabled the corps to become more effective in their work and primary duties to fight for truth, justice and order to enable every Maltese citizen and any others under their care and protection to live a decent life. Maitland’s Constitution of the Criminal Code of 1814 was also to be the forerunner of a complete criminal code. Indirectly, the promulgation of the ‘Costituzione della Corte Criminale’, from the protection of individuals who were being charged to the right of the accused to defend himself, ensured the protection of basic human rights.
Definitely, by nature, the police job is one which demands sacrifice, and commitment along with discipline but Sir Thomas Maitland’s ameliorations of both policing and criminal law legal elements meant the certainty of prompt and effective justice. This scholarly document also shaped the functions and foundations of our local police force, from a disorganised state to an organised corps unceasingly striving to seek the Lord’s wisdom to bestow on them the necessary guidance and direction as designated in their official motto which says it all – ‘Domine Dirige Nos’ meaning Lord Guide Us.
References: [1] Albert Ganado, ‘The Historical Development of the Criminal Code’ [1949] 2(4) The Law Journal 211-231 [2] Proclamation XXII of 1 July 1814. [3] Vincenzo Azopardi, ‘Raccolta di varie cose antiche e moderne utili ed interessanti riguardanti Malta e Gozo’ Malta, 1843. [4] Pulizija.gov.mt <https://pulizija.gov.mt> (accessed on 15 November 2022) [5] Proclamation XV of 25th May 1814. [6] V. Sir Thomas Maitland’s, “Address to the Judges, Consuls and other legal authorities, assembled at the Palace of Valletta, on the 2nd January, 1815.” Proclamations, Minutes etc. Government Printing Press 1821. [7] Proclamation XV of 25 May 1814. [8] Edward Attard, Il-Pulizija f’Malta: 1800-1964, Publikazzjonijiet Indipendenza 2000.
