How the almighty cover-up failed

Updated Tuesday with MBR's reply

On a Saturday night, Roderick Galdes finally handed in his resignation, after he could cling on no longer. Prime Minister Robert Abela accepted it. But within 48 hours Abela was defending his former affordable housing minister, claiming that “the allegations he faces are unproven”. Not untrue, just unproven. “There is no proof,” Abela insisted, “only many allegations.”

Galdes’s multiple properties in Malta, Gozo, Sicily, mainland Italy and the UK are not mere allegations.

Galdes’s €140,000 penthouse with its airspace, garage and rooftop jacuzzi bought from mega-developer Joseph Portelli, who benefitted handsomely from Galdes’s government contracts, isn’t an allegation.

Neither is the plot of land in Għarb that Galdes bartered for another of his apartments in Xagħra with the same Portelli and Mark Agius, who, then, also built a house for Galdes on that plot.

Galdes insisted “I have nothing to hide” as he hid multi-million-euro contracts with Portelli. And Abela defended him.

Galdes owns a home in Qormi, a house in Luqa, a house in Gozo, a studio apartment in the UK, two offices in Qormi, an old ground floor property in Qormi, an unconverted house in Siġġiewi, which he developed into tourist accommodation, an entire residential block in the mountain village of Forni di Sopra in the Dolomites, a ground floor apartment in Catania, a villa in Syracuse, which Galdes developed from a derelict uninhabitable state to a fully converted residential property, another large villa complex in Ragusa and agricultural land in Sicily.

Those aren’t allegations – they’re land, bricks and mortars worth big millions. Most of those properties were acquired by Galdes since 2013 when he first joined the ministerial cabinet, where he remained right up to that fateful Saturday night.

In his last assets declaration from 2022, Galdes declared earnings of just €65,532. He had no other income. Yet, that year, he paid off a €10,000 loan and increased his deposits by €53,582. Galdes and his family survived on just €1,950 for the whole year. And if you believe that you’ll believe anything.

In 2013, Galdes had only €23,000 in declared savings, a €166,947 mortgage and a €9,000 personal loan. Yet, in just 12 years, earning only his salary, Galdes built a massive international property empire and tripled his savings. Those aren’t allegations – they’re facts that Abela’s bluster cannot dismiss.

Abela did everything in his power to conceal those “many allegations”. He’s hidden the asset declarations of his ministers for the last three years. Now he’s completely removed the requirement for cabinet ministers to present their asset declaration and eliminated the need for them to declare their spouses’ assets. Former Labour prime minister Alfred Sant was so disgusted at Abela’s secrecy that he’s publicly chastised him.

But Abela went further. Together with Economy Minister Silvio Schembri, Abela has taken the shameful step of hiding the Malta Business Registry from the public.

As of 2025 it is practically impossible for the public to know who the ultimate beneficial owners of specific companies are.

That information was previously easily accessible online. Not anymore. That basic beneficial owners’ data is only accessible to “competent authorities and subject persons who can demonstrate a legitimate interest”.

A written application proving legitimate interest needs to be submitted to the Malta Business Registry, run by Silvio Schembri’s appointees, who will decide whether to approve or reject it.

That means we can never know who really owns LAM Projects, the company subcontracted to carry out work on Galdes’s multi-million-euro social housing projects.

Roderick Galdes’s multiple properties in Malta, Gozo, Sicily, mainland Italy and the UK are not mere allegations- Kevin Cassar

Times of Malta revealed that LAM Projects was owned by Lorenzo di Pinto, a business partner of Galdes’s younger brother, Malcolm. The company was set up in 2018 with no prior experience in the Maltese construction sector. Within months it was working on Galdes’s projects. Despite failing to file any accounts, as legally obliged, LAM continued to get more of Galdes’s government work.

LAM wasn’t the only company di Pinto was involved in. He was a major shareholder in Malta Luxury Construction Ltd, whose director and co-shareholder was Galdes’s brother, Malcolm.

The company now appears to be in dissolution. Malcolm Galdes was also involved with di Pinto in Phone Tech Ltd, a phone retail and tech services company, also being dissolved. Malcolm Galdes was also director of Anina Holding International Ltd, in which di Pinto was shareholder.

What Anina Holding Int. Ltd actually did is unclear as public information about the company is scarce.

Abela’s move to cloak the Malta Business Registry in total secrecy prevents the public from knowing who really owned those companies, particularly LAM, which was paid millions of euros for its work on Galdes’s social housing projects. Abela has made it practically impossible to get to the truth. So he can boast that “the many allegations are unproven”.

But there’s more. Abela fiercely refused to implement one key recommendation from the Caruana Galizia inquiry – unexplained wealth orders. There’s little doubt that Galdes’s modest ministerial salary could never buy him that massive property empire. It wouldn’t even suffice to fund the restoration works he carried out on his properties. Had that recommendation been implemented, Galdes would have to explain how he amassed that property empire  and, failing that, would have those properties confiscated.

That’s assuming we didn’t have the reliably compliant and perennially dormant Angelo Gafà leading the police force. Laws are pretty useless unless enforced.

Abela gave his cabinet a cast iron guarantee that the “many allegations” will never be proven. He stopped publishing their asset declarations, then simply stopped requiring them to fill them in at all, cloaked the Malta Business Registry in secrecy, refused to introduce unexplained wealth orders and appointed Gafà police commissioner.

Galdes’s resignation should not be the end of the story – it should be the beginning of a thorough criminal investigation and possible prosecution. But not in Abela’s Malta.

Abela expended tremendous efforts to stop the revelations of Galdes’s secrets. But some still surfaced. Now even Abela has realised that Galdes’s property empire is just too obscene for Abela’s own political safety. That’s the only thing that spurs Abela into action.

Kevin Cassar is a professor of surgery.

Statement from the Malta Business Registry

"The MBR confirms that the restriction of public access to beneficial ownership information was implemented on November 25, 2022, following the judgment delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union on November 22, 2022, which determined that unrestricted public access to beneficial ownership registers across EU Member States was invalid. 

Furthermore, the statement that beneficial ownership data is accessible only to “competent authorities and subject persons who can demonstrate a legitimate interest” reflects the transposition of Article 74 of Directive (EU) 2024/1649 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2024, which became applicable across the European Union on 10 July 2025.

The MBR is therefore fully compliant with the applicable EU legislative framework and its proper implementation at national level. This legislative framework, including Regulation 7 of the Companies Act (Register of Beneficial Owners) Regulations, sets clear criteria for “legitimate interest”. 

Anyone who can demonstrate such interest in preventing or combating money laundering, predicate offences, or terrorist financing may request access, and the MBR must assess each request accordingly. Any applicant dissatisfied with a decision may seek judicial review.

The MBR operates independently in carrying out these statutory functions. It does not act under direction, instruction, or influence from the Prime Minister, minister or any other external parties. 

The applicable framework is publicly established, applied consistently based on legal criteria, requires reasoned written decisions, and guarantees applicants the right to challenge decisions through established legal remedies.

This right of reply is being submitted in terms of Article 15(2) of the Media and Defamation Act and is intended for publication in accordance with the provisions of that Act.” 

Dr Geraldine A. Spiteri is Chief Executive Officer of MBR