Dean of the Faculty of Law Kevin Aquilina has criticised Mr Justice Silvio Meli's decision to comment on a British law firm's opinion regarding the human right of the Caruana Galizia family, stating that such comments were made at a premature stage.

Mr Justice Meli is presiding over a Constitutional case instituted by the widower and children of slain journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia for the removal of deputy police commissioner Silvio Valletta from the investigation into her assassination.

The services of UK law firm Doughty Street Chambers were sought by the Caruana Galizia family. The firm had advised the family that the investigation into the assassination violates procedural requirements of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Mr Justice Meli, on Tuesday, described the British law firm's opinion, that the Caruana Galizia family's human rights have been breached, as a "manipulative orchestration" aimed at undermining Malta's rule of law and to influence the judiciary.

Interviewed by The Malta Independent editor-in-chief Rachel Attard, and asked whether the judge should have criticised the move and if he believes the judge should have acted in that way, Aquilina said that if he was the judge he would not express himself on these issues, "more so if the document in question is not presented as evidence in court. At that stage I would have left things as they were, in the sense that I would have tried to mediate - as in fact he did - giving the parties the opportunity to try and agree and arrange the case between them. Then if no agreement is found the evidence would begin to be heard and then one can go into that advice, but I think it was a bit premature to express oneself on the advice when it was not yet produced and exhibited in the acts of the case."