A court has dismissed Opposition Leader Simon Busuttil's claims that an editorial in L-Orizzont implied that his company had traded in influence.

Dr Busuttil had filed a libel suit against former editor Sandro Mangion over a March 2014 editorial entitled ‘Trading in influence'.

The editorial centred on revelations that a company Dr Busuttil was involved in until 2013, Europa Research and Consultancy Services Ltd, had been awarded direct orders by previous Nationalist administrations amounting to over €1 million.

The Opposition leader, the editorial continued, had no other response except that his company took over such consultancies because it was the only one with the necessary competence.

The editorial referred to a number of companies which had resorted to the illegal practice of trading in influence and said that Dr Busuttil therefore had the duty to put people's mind at rest that neither him nor his companies were ever involved in such an abusive practice.

Dr Busuttil took exception to comments suggesting that he was a co-participant in criminal acts, and to the newspaper's request that he declare the details of his relations with businessmen while he was serving as MEP. The wording of the editorial, he continued, led people to conclude that illegalities had been carried out.

Dr Busuttil said the editorial was not simply a political critique, as expected in a democratic society, but rather an attack on his integrity.

Mr Mangion argued that the article was based on recently published information and did not imply that Europa Research and Consultancy Ltd had acted illegally. In fact, Dr Busuttil was asked to issue a clarification on the matter. The defendant also said that, as Opposition Leader, Dr Busuttil was subject to a harsher degree of scrutiny.

Magistrate Francesco Depasquale held that the editorial was based on public information which was not being contested by Dr Busuttil. The plaintiff was only contesting the insinuation that his company was involved in an illegal practice.

The court noted that the editorial did not directly link Dr Busuttil or his company to any illegal practices. On the other hand, it said that Dr Busuttil should demonstrate that this was not the case.

"The plaintiff, instead of answering to the allegations made against him and making public clarifications, as was asked of him, he instead resorted to legal action."

The court therefore threw out the case.