Updated with AG's reply
The Attorney General decided not to appeal a judgment acquitting a contractor from bribing former Rabat mayor Frank Fabri, who is now permanent secretary at the Education Ministry, Times of Malta was told.
Police sources said the case file was forwarded to the Attorney General, Peter Grech, for his consideration. However, he decided not to appeal the case despite strong legal arguments to the contrary, they added.
Questions sent to the Attorney General’s office to explain his decision remained unanswered despite reminders.
The court acquitted cleaning contractor John Borg who claimed he used to pay kickbacks to Dr Fabri in 2006.
Magistrate Donatella Frendo Dimech ruled the police had failed to prove the veracity of telephone conversation recordings made by Mr Borg shedding light on his dealings with the former Rabat Labour mayor.
The judgment confirms the unfoundedness of the allegations
The court also threw out statements Mr Borg gave the police, in which he claimed giving Dr Fabri money in relation to a public contract, on grounds that he had not been assisted by a lawyer as required by law.
According to records of the court case, Mr Borg told the police he used to pay Mr Fabri €345 a month and that his cleaning contract was stopped when he refused to increase the amount of monthly ‘kickbacks’ to €575 a month.
The court decided not to consider these recordings because the prosecution did not prove that it was Mr Borg’s voice that was heard.
Dr Fabri had exercised his legal right not to reply to questions in order not to incriminate himself.
He failed to reply when asked by this newspaper whether he had received kickbacks from Mr Borg. He said: “The final court judgment confirms the unfoundedness of the allegations and my innocence”.
The police said Dr Fabri was investigated about the claimed corruption before Mr Borg’s arraignment but no charges were ever issued against him.
The dual role of the Attorney General as counsel to the government and also public prosecutor at the same time has been criticised by international institutions for years. The government has now decided to separate the two roles although it will still appoint both the Attorney General and the proposed Public Prosecutor.
'We exercise discretion' - AG's office
In a statement after the publication of the article, the Office of the Attorney General said it unreservedly disassociated itself from, and denied claims of wrongdoing made in the article.
The office recalled "its policy and duty" to exercise discretion when choosing or declining to comment on court decisions and on pending cases. Such exercise of discretion is necessary to respect the privacy of persons involved in criminal proceedings, to allow the courts to decide cases, including appeals, before them without undue public pressure and to give court decisions the respect they deserve.
Decisions of the Court of Magistrates are appealed or otherwise, whether in full or in part, on the basis of a legal evaluation of the merits and nothing else, the AG's office said.