Robert Abela on Thursday pledged to publish the conclusions of a magisterial inquiry into the death of Jean Paul Sofia in his first comments since government MPs vetoed a request for a public inquiry into the tragedy.
In a MaltaToday interview, the prime minister insisted he would personally ensure justice with the late youth’s family, and use all "tools” available to close any gaps left by the magisterial inquiry.
However, he continued to shoot down calls for a public inquiry, insisting only a magisterial investigation could bring about justice.
The interview was streamed live on Facebook, where social media users continued expressing outrage at the government’s decision to shoot down a call for a public inquiry.
Among those reacting to the prime minister’s comments, Sofia’s mother Isabelle Bonnici asked why Abela had not asked for her to also be present for the interview.
She criticised the government for a five-year delay in launching a licensing system for building contractors.
“There’s a huge difference between what one pledges to do and what one actually does (bejn il-kliem u l-fatti hemm baħar jikkumbatti),” she said.
Abela said launching a public inquiry into the death of Sofia could create a precedent, with the survivors of other tragedies questioning the lack of a public inquiry into the death of their loved ones.
Dismissing interviewer Kurt Sansone’s attempts at drawing parallels with the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia, which was followed by magisterial and public inquiries, Abela repeatedly drew comparisons with the case of Miriam Pace, saying in that case, the magisterial inquiry was concluded in just over a month, and justice immediately served.
He said only a magisterial investigation would lead to justice in this case, insisting that a public inquiry was toothless.
Abela on Thursday wrote to the Chief Justice reiterating his call for a speedy conclusion to the magisterial inquiry, following a similar request on April 13.
“I will publish the report of the magisterial inquiry,” Abela said, adding: “once it is concluded, I will ask for a copy of the report and [Bonnici] will be the first person I will hand a copy to”.
During the live stream, Bonnici urged Abela to launch a public inquiry to convince people that he truly had nothing to hide and wanted justice.
Abela reiterated his concern that one inquiry could clash with the other and acknowledged that someone should be found responsible for shortcomings that led to the death of Sofia.
“The building didn’t collapse on its own,” he said, adding that criminal liability will also be followed by financial compensation for the family.
He also acknowledged allegations about the irregular concession of public land to developers of the site where Sofia died, saying that had he been the magistrate tasked with the inquiry, he would look into those claims.
If the magisterial inquiry found that the developers of the site were handed the concession irregularly, then this would be investigated, he assured.
Abela denied he had any business link with the developers.
During the interview, Abela also slammed the Opposition, claiming the PN had tried to capitalise from the victim's relatives' pain “to score political brownie points”.
But Bonnici, still following the interview, commented: “do not insult my intelligence please. I have brains and no mother will let anyone use her”.
Bonnici also questioned why the prime minister did not look her in the eyes when he exited parliament on Wednesday.
Sansone also asked the prime minister to react to comments that his attendance at a National Philharmonic Orchestra fundraiser in Girgenti, just three hours after voting against the public inquiry was insensitive.
He said he had attended the concert as it was pre-planned, admitting, however, that he could have skipped the event.
'I never asked for a public inquiry instead of a magisterial one'
Contacted following the interview, Bonnici told Times of Malta she has never asked for the halting of a magisterial inquiry.
“I have always insisted on a public inquiry, irrespective of a magisterial inquiry, and not instead of it. One does not interrupt the other.
“A public inquiry is carried out in public, including the testimony of witnesses and the collection of evidence. I want to be able to attend the sittings and participate in the inquiry. As things stand, with a magisterial inquiry I have no idea what is going on.”
Bonnici questioned why the Maltese law allowed for a public inquiry, if, as is being claimed, a public inquiry would not reveal anything different from a magisterial inquiry.