MP Rosianne Cutajar’s actions and behaviour indicated she had acted as a broker in a multi-million Euro property deal, despite her denials, ethics commissioner George Hyzler testified on Monday.  

“When weighing the facts, and looking at all of Cutajar’s actions, it led me to the conclusion, based on the preponderance of probability, that she had indeed acted as a broker, or co-broker, in this transaction. Her actions led others to believe this too,” Hyzler said. 

The commissioner for standards in public life was appearing before parliament’s standards committee, as he walked MPs through his investigation into Cutajar, which concluded there was prime facie evidence of ethical misconduct.

The investigation was launched after Times of Malta last year reported how Cutajar was allegedly being chased to pay back some €46,000 in cash  for her role in brokering a property deal involving alleged Daphne Caruana Galizia murder conspirator Yorgen Fenech.  

She maintains she was not involved in the deal, but is the subject of a tax evasion investigation. 

'Committee leaks like a seive'

At the start of the sitting, Speaker Anglu Farrugia, who chairs the committee, read out a copy of a letter sent to him by Cutajar’s associate Charles Farrugia, in which he informed the House that he had been the one to receive cash from the deal as a form of gift and that he would be regularising his position with the tax authorities. 

Times of Malta reported on the letter shortly before the meeting began. 

Labour MP Glenn Bedingfield was quick to raise concerns that documents, including this letter, were being leaked to the press and repeatedly implied it was the Opposition members that were responsible.

Both Opposition MPs Karol Aquilina and Therese Comodini Cachia denied the charge.  

“This committee leaks more than a sieve,” Bedingfield said.  

The MP then turned his attention to Hyzler, asking whether he had spoken to every party of this case before publishing his report. 

“I don’t necessarily have to speak to everyone. I spoke to those I feel can assist or contribute. So for instance I didn’t speak to Yorgen Fenech after it became clear that all he could do was confirm facts that were already backed up by documentary evidence,” he said. 

Bedingfield, however, hit back saying the commissioner had concluded brokerage had been paid without speaking to one of the people who had allegedly paid it. 

This case, Hyzler said, was unique in that he not only had to establish whether ethical standards had been violated but first had to establish whether a specific action had been carried out.  

“In this case we had to establish the fact in contestation and then whether there was a violation. There was no precedent for this. I had to interpret what that prima facie is. I can't rest on the prima facie level of proof in criminal law,  without any reasonable doubt. The level of proof to be applied, in my opinion, was the preponderance of probability, in other words, what is most likely to have happened,” he said.  

“I had a person claiming they paid a brokerage and another person saying they never received it. The circumstances showed it was most likely, however, that it had been paid.”

Hyzler went on to raise concerns, which were mirrored in his report, about Cutajar’s associate, Farrugia. 

He said that when looking over the evidence, it appeared that from the first day the property deal started being worked out this person who was so close to Cutajar had introduced her as a broker and treated her as nothing but a broker. 

“She certainly found the buyer. She communicated with him, discussed the price, visited the site. She regularly called to chase up the promise of sale. She encouraged Fenech to buy the property. She may not have been present for the signing, but the agreement includes the term ‘brokerage’,” Hyzler said. 

He added that he had to come to the conclusion he did when considering all these facts together.  

Turning to chats between Cutajar and Fenech, Hyzler said these had been presented by the MP, ostensibly to prove she had not accepted a brokerage. However, while in the chats she clearly said she was not getting a fee, she repeatedly made “insinuations” that she wanted something out of the deal. 

Bedingfield asked Hyzler whether he was sure Cutajar had received a brokerage. If it was probable that she received it, then it was also possible she had not, the MP said.

“If you were to ask me what I think happened, I know what I think,” Hyzler retorted.  

The commissioner assured the committee that he had not taken this investigation lightly. 

He said the thought that Cutajar may have been dragged into this case for ulterior motives kept him up at night while he was deciding on the case. 

“I gave a lot of weight to the fact that politicians can get dragged into things,” he said.  

“But I also gave weight to the fact that Cutajar and Farrugia are still intimate friends, and then if he dragged her into this in the first place, how would they still be so close? I would have thrown someone out of the window had they done something like that to me.” 

The sitting of the committee was suspended and will continue on Tuesday at 8am.