Robert Abela has defended his insinuation that it would be “political terrorism” if an inquiry into the Vitals hospitals privatisation deal has truly been concluded now, weeks before an election.

In comments on Monday, Abela said that if rumours were true and the magisterial inquiry has just been concluded, public trust in the judicial process would be undermined given the timing.

Speaking to reporters, Abela defended remarks made on Sunday that "justice should not mean political terrorism".

His remarks prompted criticism from the Chamber of Advocates, which said he was attacking the judiciary, and the Opposition, which called him paranoid.

Malta will go to the polls on June 8 to vote for its European Parliament members and local councillors. Thirty-nine people will be contesting the MEP elections, though Abela’s predecessor Joseph Muscat is not one of them.

Muscat is at the centre of the Vitals inquiry and his home and office were raided by police as part of that probe in January 2022.

Times of Malta has revealed that Muscat received payments from a Swiss intermediary linked to former hospital concessionaries, Vitals Global Healthcare and Steward Health Care. Muscat insists the payments were legitimate ones for consultancy work he did after he resigned as prime minister.

He has also filed a series of court cases seeking to have that investigation reassigned to a different magistrate, claiming that the current one, Gabriella Vella, is politically partisan.

Earlier this year, Abela backed Muscat’s line of defence and said the inquiry was taking too long to conclude, adding that the delay “raised suspicions” that it was being timed to coincide with the June MEP elections..

On Monday, Abela said he would not speak about the merits of any case or any person but about his fears that confidence in the judicial process would be undermined by actions seen as interfering with the electoral process.

The inquiry into the scandal-hit hospitals' deal, he explained, should have been concluded in 60 days. Yet it had taken four-and-half years.

Three months ago he had publicly voiced his worry about the potential timing of the submission of the inquiry report in a way aimed at hindering the political timeline of the elections to cause maximum damage to the Labour Party. And now it appeared that those fears were being realised.

Abela said he hoped he was wrong and it was not true that the magistrate had, of all days, picked the day when the candidates submitted their nominations to submit her report. That would be known on Tuesday, when the Attorney General will be asked in court whether she has received the report.  

The prime minister preemptively defended himself from accusations that he was leaning on the judiciary, saying it was his part of his job as head of government to keep tabs on the judiciary.

Asked by Malta Today what his reaction would be if the magistrate in her report called for police action against former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, Abela said he could not comment on hypothetical situations.

In any case, he insisted he was not speaking about any person or the merits of any case, but about his real fear that confidence in the judicial process could be undermined in the eyes of the people.

The judicial process needed to be neutral and independent and it could not be seen as being used for any political timeline. Any doubt that it was being used for any purpose other than the administration of justice would instil a lack of confidence. And it was the inquiring magistrate who had a duty to ensure that this did not happen, Abela said.

Lawyers: Stop attacking judiciary

Meanwhile, the Chamber of Advocates accused the prime minister of unleashing a direct attack on the judiciary. 

Robert Abela was not only the leader of the Labour Party but also Malta’s prime minister, the chamber said. It was reacting to a similar veiled comment that the prime minister made on Sunday. 

“Therefore, he is obliged to weigh his words carefully without undermining the judiciary and its work. The judiciary should be left to work in liberty without interference,” the chamber said. 

“It was only the judiciary that can safeguard the rule of law and guarantees justice for all. It should not be criticised for political or partisan reasons.”

PN: Abela systematically interfering

The Nationalist Party branded Abela’s comments as irresponsible and dangerous. 

The PN said the government is now accusing the judiciary for carrying out its work and investigating what the police failed to do in years. 

“Robert Abela is breaching his own duty as prime minister by systematically attacking judges and magistrates who are doing their work to ensure justice is done.”

While the prime minister always insisted he would let the institutions do their work, he is now trying to interfere in the process. 

“In his paranoia, Abela believes that everyone takes decisions according to electoral considerations, the way he does.”