The Maltese Anti Corruption Establishment

Bajada has a past criminal conviction for fraud at Kingston Crown Court in London in 1993. He was found guilty of ten counts of fraud and accused of appropriating £59,329 through payment authorisation vouchers during his tenure at Air Malta.

Despite his criminal record, Bajada has continued to serve as an expert witness in legal proceedings and remains an active member of the Maltese legal profession, raising concerns about his credibility and ethics. Many have demanded that this alone should warrant his disqualification from participating in these cases and informing the court’s findings, including William Cushieri, who represented Degiorgio in the Daphne Caruana Galizia case.

Martin Bajada has been appointed as an expert witness in multiple high-profile cases. He claims expertise in a number of fields, including Information Technology, telephone, CCTV, handwriting analysis, and cybersecurity. All these subject matters are of great importance in trials as they can significantly impact the outcome of the case and require highly specialised knowledge to give expert opinion.

For an expert to testify on such critical matters, extensive scholarly accolades are typically needed. These could include certifications from reputable organisations such as the International Association of Document Examiners (I.A.D.E) or the Forensic Science Society (F.S.S). Expert witnesses are expected to have recognised qualifications and experience in their field, ensuring that their testimonies are reliable and accurate.

Despite lacking the essential educational credentials, including even undergraduate degrees, in the highly specialised fields of computer forensics, mobile forensics, audio and video forensic, and handwriting analysis, he has been appointed as an expert witness in these areas. It is crucial to note that each of these fields demands rigorous academic study at an advanced level and a continuous commitment to learning in order to maintain expertise.

Given the complexity and significance of these academic domains, It's worth considering why the Maltese Courts continue to rely on a sentenced fraudster without the educational credentials in the multiple forensic fields he practices when tasked with such important responsibilities.

In the trial surrounding the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, Bajada was called upon to provide expert evidence in digital forensics and cyber investigations. He provided various types of evidence, including phone data analysis, data from cell masts, phone cloning data research, cyber expertise, and CCTV evidence. However, opposing lawyer William Cushieri raised concerns about Bajada’s qualifications during the trial, questioning his ability to provide reliable and accurate evidence in such a high-profile case.

Most importantly, despite abundant ways to track a person in the modern era (BTS mobile phone pings, mobile phone forensics, and CCTV analysis), Bajada has failed to make a detailed forensic map of the assassins' movements in the weeks before the bombing. Especially on a small island like Malta, such elementary analysis in those fields should have revealed their employer.

Within the courtroom setting, Bajada further acknowledged his inability to definitively ascertain the individuals responsible for the attack and the communication involved, stating, "I can never assert with certainty who operated each device or initiated those calls."

The decision of the Maltese government to entrust a convicted fraudster, who lacks the necessary multiple forensic degree qualifications, with handling such crucial cases raises significant concerns. It begs the question of why more suitable candidates are consistently overlooked for this role, prompting further scrutiny of the selection process.

This is further complicated by the inherent difficulty in challenging the testimony of an expert witness, as opposed to the appealable nature of a judge's verdict.

This brings to the forefront the fundamental issue of the integrity and fairness of the legal system. When the credibility and abilities of the expert witness are under question, it naturally raises doubts about the veracity of the legal outcomes influenced by his testimonies.

Mr Justice Noel Cushieri of the Court has ruled that it was ‘in the general administration of justice that Bajada’s expert report should be removed’ from the Daphne Caruana Galizia case. This is a clear indication of the concern this matter deserves and reinforces the need for more stringent checks on the qualifications and background of expert witnesses in the future.

The criminal justice system serves as a mechanism for societal reform and integration, rooted in the belief that individuals deserve a second chance. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that second chances can manifest differently, and certain past actions inherently curtail future opportunities.

For instance, let's contemplate a scenario where a bank robber is assigned the task of driving a security van. While society may endorse the concept of redemption, it would be impractical and ill-advised to entrust that individual with comparable responsibilities going forward.

Consequently, while second chances hold significance, the nature of certain actions warrants the imposition of constraints on future prospects.