Former police inspector and FIAU official Jonathan Ferris told a court on Wednesday that he was never given a chance to investigate allegations linking former prime minister Joseph Muscat or his wife to the secret Panama company Egrant and had never lied on oath when testifying before the magistrate handling the Egrant inquiry.
“I never said that Egrant belonged to Muscat or his wife,” said Ferris when testifying at length in ongoing proceedings where he stands accused of perjury over apparent discrepancies in his testimony before then-magistrate Aaron Bugeja who wrapped up his inquiry on Egrant in July 2018.
Ferris explained that the apparent discrepancy which the prosecution had hinged its case upon was nothing but a human error given that at the time, he had been testifying from memory.
Ferris also said that Magistrate Bugeja did not order the police to prosecute him but for him to explain to police and only then, if necessary, to press charges.
Discrepancy in testimony was human error
He explained that back in April 2017, after leaving the police corps to take up a managerial position at the financial crimes regulator, Ferris was tasked with drawing up a set of questions which the FIAU were to put to the MFSA and employees at the now-shuttered Pilatus bank.
A compliance report on the bank, prepared by the regulator in March 2016, had flagged a suspicious €1 million transaction from a third party account to a high-risk account.
The report said that the bank, including its money laundering reporting officer, could only supply a generic explanation and the third party had made several deposits.
While working on questions to be put to the bank, stories emerged on Daphne Caruana Galizia’s Running Commentary.
That blog was viewed as “intelligence” and given much attention by the FIAU, as attested by a series of messages Ferris said he received from Ruth Gauci, senior analyst, telling him to check a particular post or another on Daphne’s blog.
He also recalled a copy of one of those blogs being placed in the FIAU intelligence file. That blog concerned an alleged USD 400,000 transaction to Michelle Muscat’s partner in the Buttardi jewellery business from the sister of the Pilatus bank owner.
“That’s what started it all,” said Ferris.
When later testifying at the Egrant inquiry, he had cited that amount as €600,000.
But he never said that that transaction went to Egrant.
“I don’t know where the prosecution got that from. The transaction mentioned Buttardi,” he insisted.
Inquiring Magistrate Aaron Bugeja had asked him squarely whether during his time at the FIAU he had come across any intelligence linking Muscat or his party to Egrant.
“My reply was clear. ‘They didn’t give me a chance,’ was my reply to Magistrate Bugeja…..They cast me aside,” went on Ferris.
Then-Magistrate Bugeja had also made it very clear to Ferris that the terms of reference of the inquiry did not allow him to find out who Egrant actually belonged to.
Information from John Dalli
Ferris said the only intelligence he got concerning Egrant had come from former EU commissioner John Dalli who had confided some information to him.
That was before he moved away from the police corps to join the FIAU.
Since as inspector he had handled investigations into many “big cases” before stepping away, Ferris said he had contacted the subject persons to inform them that their case would be taken over by someone else.
That was when Dalli spoke to Ferris in confidence.
“Let me have a word with you. I never met someone like you within the corps. If the FIAU wants to make some noise, if you want to know what Egrant is all about, Egrant stands for Election Grants,” Dalli had told him.
Ferris says he was kept away from government-related investigations
Ferris said that after May 2, 2017 he was practically reduced to “a ghost” at the workplace.
He was told to keep away from any government-related investigations while work tasks were shared among other officials.
“All the information I gave at the inquiry was based on the investigation I had carried out over some four days,” he said.
He pointed out that when testifying earlier, former Superintendent Yvonne Farrugia “fairly” stated that he had been “testifying from memory”.
“I have a track record…It would never cross my mind to take a false oath. Let alone before [then] Magistrate Bugeja!”
The case continues. Magistrate Marse-Ann Farrugia is presiding.
Inspector Wayne R Borg is prosecuting.
Lawyer Jason Azzopardi is defence counsel.