Appeal dismissed after defendant threatened a Water Services Corporation inspector who photographed an illegally connected water pipe at a construction site.
Court of Criminal Appeal · Honourable Judge Dr. Edwina Grima LL.D. · 24 April 2026
On 27 March 2025, Abdullah Alkasem confronted Robert Busuttil, an Operations Manager (Theft Section) with the Water Services Corporation, near a construction site in Triq il-Liedna, Fgura. Busuttil had been conducting an inspection after noticing a pipe illegally connected to a WSC main, and photographed a vehicle at the scene for identification purposes. Alkasem immediately descended from the vehicle, threatened to wring Busuttil's neck if he did not delete the photographs, and proceeded to remove the illegally connected pipe. The Magistrates' Court convicted Alkasem on all three charges: insulting and threatening Busuttil under Article 339(1)(e) of Chapter 9, voluntarily disturbing public order and peace under Article 338(dd), and causing Busuttil fear of violence under Article 251(3) of the Criminal Code. He was fined €6,000, placed under a three-year restraining order in favour of Busuttil, and bound over for one year under a personal obligation of €1,000. Alkasem appealed, arguing that the public order charge required witnesses beyond the victim himself, and that the fear-of-violence charge under Article 251(3) required a repeated course of conduct — which a single isolated incident could not satisfy. He also challenged the proportionality of the fine and contested whether the victim qualified as a public official under Article 222(1). The Court of Criminal Appeal rejected all grounds. On the public order charge, it noted that an anonymous caller had telephoned the Paola police station to report an argument between two men, demonstrating that the confrontation was visible and alarming enough to disturb third parties — satisfying the threshold of even minimal concern about physical safety or property. On the fear-of-violence charge, the court clarified that Article 251(3) — unlike Article 251B — does not require a course of conduct; a single, isolated threat is sufficient. Busuttil's own testimony, in which he expressed fear of encountering Alkasem again at future inspection sites, confirmed that genuine fear had been instilled. Finally, the court held that because the Attorney General had not cross-appealed on the question of sentence, it was precluded from imposing a harsher penalty. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and the original sentence confirmed.
Appeal dismissed. Original sentence confirmed: Abdullah Alkasem found guilty on all three charges — insulting/threatening (Art. 339(1)(e)), breach of public order (Art. 338(dd)), and causing fear of violence (Art. 251(3)). Penalty: fine of €6,000; three-year restraining order in favour of Robert Busuttil under Art. 412C of the Criminal Code; personal obligation/bond of €1,000 for one year under Art. 383 Ch. 9.
Criminal Code Ch. 9 — Art. 339(1)(e) threats/insults; Art. 338(dd) breach of public order; Art. 251(3) causing fear of violence; Art. 222(1)(c) aggravating circumstances; Art. 383 personal obligation; Art. 382A and 412C restraining orders