Joseph Muscat still has faith in his former chief of staff Keith Schembri “as a person”, he told a court on Monday.

The former prime minister, who was forced out of office in January 2020 following national anti-corruption protests, said that he could “vouch for no one”. But he nevertheless said he “still had faith in Schembri as a person to date.” 

In two hours of cross-examination during a libel case he filed against lawyer Christian Grima, Muscat also argued that he knew former top policeman Silvio Valletta was friends with Yorgen Fenech, but that the business tycoon was not linked to the Caruana Galizia murder case at the time when Valletta led the investigation. 

The Caruana Galizia family, he said, had objected to Valletta’s role in the case because at the time he was married to one of Muscat’s ministers (Justyne Caruana), “not because of his friendship with Fenech.” 

The case in which Muscat was testifying concerns a Facebook post in which Grima appeared to imply that Muscat was involved in the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia. 

Grima, reacting to a video clip featuring Muscat’s wife Michelle talking about “what happened” to Caruana Galizia, wrote: “What happened to her? Your husband blew her up. That’s what happened to her.”

Muscat promptly sued Grima for libel. 

When testifying previously in the proceedings, Muscat said that the lawyer’s comment had definitely crossed “a red line.”

When facing cross-examination on Monday, Muscat reaffirmed that Grima’s words “left no room for interpretation. It was written clearly (ċar u tond) that I was the perpetrator or somehow involved in the murder.” 

Burden of proof reversed

“I came here under the impression that Grima’s assertions had a figurative meaning. But given the line of questioning, I now understand that they want to prove that I was truly involved or knew about the murder,” said Muscat. 

Magistrate Victor Axiak also noted that the line of questioning by Grima’s lawyer on Monday appeared to “show something else” to the lawyer’s stance in previous sittings, when he had sought to reach an amicable settlement with Muscat. 

Grima’s lawyer, Carl Grech, explained that he still stood by that declaration.

As the lengthy cross-examination progressed, Muscat’s lawyer Pawlu Lia asked the court to reverse the burden of proof. 

The defendant was claiming that what he had written was not defamatory because it was true, Lia argued, so he now had to prove the veracity of his allegations. 

The court agreed with Lia’s point and ordered, towards the end of the day’s hearing, that the burden of proof be reversed.

On Schembri

Muscat was asked about Schembri’s final day in office, when the two met for a late-night meeting at Muscat’s house in Burmarrad. Hours later, Schembri wound up arrested in connection with Caruana Galizia’s murder. 

“There was a political crisis. Konrad Mizzi had resigned too. Keith Schembri told me that he did not want me to be attacked any further because of him,” he said. 

Schembri had at that point decided to "call it a day," Muscat said. 

The Facebook post that sparked the libel.

Muscat said that at the time of the meeting, he was not informed of his former right-hand man’s imminent arrest and “I don’t think he [Schembri] was either.” 

The defence said Schembri had stated in public that he always informed Muscat of everything he did.  Muscat himself never denied knowing what Schembri was up to, Grech said. 

“No,” hit back Muscat.

“Did that mean that Schembri was acting behind your back?”

“Schembri will defend himself but I can vouch for no one,” replied Muscat. Schembri had not given him cause to think that he was betraying his trust, he also testified. 

Muscat said he had been critical of his former chief of staff in the past, though he could not state “the day, time or date” when he had done so. 

He however alluded to a Times of Malta interview, saying he had made comments “in that sense” on that occasion. 

In the interview, held eight months after Muscat left office, he had said that “time will tell” whether Schembri lied but that he would not judge him in advance and would “not ditch him”.  

“Are you aware of something which to date has not yet been disclosed?”asked the Magistrate.

“Absolutely no,” said the witness.

Fainting

“Do you suffer from some medical condition that causes you to faint?”asked Grima’s lawyer, Carl Grech.

“Yes,” replied Muscat. 

“And was that condition kept under control all throughout your tenure except on October 14, 2017?”

“That’s absolutely incorrect,” said Muscat, explaining that the only time he fainted in public was because he took his medication not according to the prescribed dose “and that happened some week before October 14.”

“Did that [fainting] episode have anything to do with someone telling you that Daphne Caruana Galizia was to be killed?”asked Magistrate Victor George Axiak, stepping in with a direct question to cut the story short. 

“Absolutely no,” came the reply. 

Muscat said it was his decision to rope in the US’ FBI in the murder investigation, and recalled that he had asked Schembri to get in touch with the then-US Charges d’Affairs Mark Schapiro. 

“Assassin”

Muscat previously testified that no one, not even his harshest critic had said that he was directly or indirectly involved in the journalist’s murder. 

“But in the days leading up to your resignation, there were civil protests….pjazez shah were calling you assassin,” said Grech. 

“I wasn’t in the squares and I don’t know what was being said. But nowhere did someone say or write that I was involved in the murder of Caruana Galizia, including the public inquiry.”

Asked about statements along those lines made in Parliament, Muscat rebutted, “no one said that in Parliament. Bring them here.”

“We will. One by one,” countered Grima’s lawyer.

“It does not appear that there was anyone in Parliament- at least as far as I know- who said the words that Dr Grima said…that I was involved in the murder.” 

Pardon and murder briefings

Muscat confirmed that he had assumed sole responsibility for the decision to grant murder middleman Melvin Theuma a presidential pardon. He had not shared information about Theuma with Schembri, he said. 

“Could he have had access to it?” Muscat was asked. 

“Not from my side, certainly not.

Muscat confirmed that he had authorised the tapping of Theuma’s and Yorgen Fenech’s phones, but denied giving that authorisation during briefings with Caruana Galizia murder investigators and members of the Malta Security Service. 

He said he had never heard the recordings made by Theuma, and recalled that at briefings he had been told there was doubt “whether the recordings existed at all. 

As for former police officer Kenneth Camilleri, Muscat explained that he was one of eight officers detailed as security with the former prime minister “and none were involved in those meetings.” 

Muscat was also asked about a letter Schembri sent to his friend Yorgen Fenech via doctor Adrian Vella in the days after Fenech was arrested. The letter detailed an earlier plot to kill Caruana Galizia.

Muscat said that prior to the assassination, “he definitely had no indication of any previous plot.”

“But Schembri knew. He mentioned it in his letter to Fenech,” pressed on Grech.

“Ask him. I gave my answer. Today I know because it is in the public domain.”

One of his former cabinet members, Chris Cardona, was among the very first to be summoned by then-magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera who first took on the murder inquiry.

But Muscat said he was not aware of that, though he knew that Scerri Herrera had renounced to the inquiry after a few hours. 

“Precisely! Yet in those few hours she had summoned Cardona,” said Grech.

The case continues.