A court has refused a former top Pilatus Bank official’s request to play an active role in an ongoing case concerning the attorney general’s decision to not prosecute her former colleague.
Claude-Ann Sant Fournier argued that the AG decision meant prosecutors had decided she was to “drown” while others were handed a lifeline and allowed to “remain afloat”.
Sant Fournier served as Pilatus Bank’s money laundering reporting officer. She stands accused of aiding and abetting money laundering activities both in her personal capacity as well as in her former official role at the bank.
While prosecutors opted to press charges against her, they issued a nolle prosequi – an instruction not to prosecute – with respect to other former bank officials, including Sant Fournier’s former colleague, Antoniella Gauci.
Pilatus Bank was shut down by regulators following years of allegations and investigations into alleged money laundering. Sant Fournier is the only bank official to face criminal charges concerning bank operations.
The nolle prosequi decision is being contested in court by NGO Repubblika. Sant Fournier sought the court’s permission to take part in those proceedings. That request was turned down, but Sant Fournier sought permission to appeal that decision.
Her lawyer, Stefano Filletti, argued that there were legitimate questions to be asked about the AG decision to prosecute his client but not others.
“Was the nolle prosequi based on objective facts or was there some backroom deal? And were norms followed?” he asked. While Repubblika had filed the court action as concerned citizens, Sant Fournier had a more direct interest in the case, Filletti added.
He argued that some of the issues flagged by prosecutors as criminal were Gauci’s responsibility, but his client was being made to pay for them.
State Advocate lawyer Fiorella Fenech Vella rebutted that the nulle prosequi decision was not taken lightly or for underhand reasons.
Gauci was lower in rank than Sant Fournier at the bank and the police had confirmed that with the evidence in hand, they could not proceed against her.
“If [Sant Fournier’s] lawyer has any evidence, he should produce it in the criminal proceedings so that perhaps it might lead to something new,” the lawyer argued.
Following deliberations, the court turned down Sant Fournier’s request, saying her issues with the AG decision were not part of the merits of proceedings before the court.
The court could only review the AG’s decision not to prosecute specific persons who were not Sant Fournier, Madam Justice Doreen Clarke said.
The case continues.
Lawyer Jason Azzopardi is assisting Repubblika.