Opposition leader Adrian Delia and MP Jason Azzopardi on Monday urged the government to implement the recommendations of a recent Council of Europe report about the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, particularly the call for the holding of a public inquiry.
The report, penned by rapporteur Pieter Omtzigt, was approved by a large majority of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
But Justice Minister Owen Bonnici reiterated criticism of Dr Omtzigt, saying he had drawn criticism for a report which had looked into the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over the Ukraine in 2017. On Twitter, Dr Bonnici said, Dr Omtzigt had himself admitted to wrongdoing and attributed this to his desire to “get to the truth.”
The Opposition MPs spoke during a debate on a Bill introducing amendments to various laws for the better administration of justice.
Dr Azzopardi said there were three reasons to call for a public inquiry separate to the ongoing magisterial inquiry. A public inquiry would investigate the motive for the assassination, whether Ms Caruana Galizia’s death was avoidable, and whether there was political responsibility to be borne for the death, three key elements which the magisterial inquiry was prevented from considering.
Dr Delia quoted from the Council of Europe report, saying that Malta’s deficiencies were exposing all of Europe to vulnerabilities. “A Maltese passport is an EU passport.”
Malta was also suffering reputational damage, as evidenced by the departure of BOV’s last US correspondent bank.
The Maltese judiciary had come under fire, with the Prime Minister accused of appointing judges based on their political affiliations and encouraged to refrain from making any further appointments.
The report had also recommended the implementation of all of the Venice Commission’s recommendations, Dr Delia said. In contrast, changes which the government had proposed were described as 'a parody' by professors at the Faculty of Laws.
Concluding, he added that, although many members of the public had expressed weariness at the Opposition’s continued criticism of ministers’ involvement in the Panama Papers scandal, such criticism was the Opposition’s duty as the issue had preoccupied all of Europe. He appealed to the government to consider the Council of Europe report properly.
Dr Azzopardi said that the Opposition had once again been proven right by the Council of Europe. Criticism of the State Advocate Bill, which failed to live up to the Venice Commission’s recommendations, had been ignored by the government but was endorsed by the Council of Europe’s report.
No EU member-state had ever been “embarrassed” in this way by a Council of Europe report. Much to the government’s dismay, the report had been approved by “a large majority” - two-thirds - of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Prime Minister Joseph Muscat was the first European leader to be accused of the Council of Europe of “protecting criminals,” Dr Azzopardi said.
The report identified the “impunity” enjoyed by Tourism Minister Konrad Mizzi, OPM chief-of-staff Keith Schembri, and Nexia BT financial consultant Brian Tonna as a cause for concern, pointing out that there had been resignations in Mongolia but not in Malta after the Panama Papers investigation was published.
Azeri MPs had been the only representatives present to defend Maltese amendments to the COE report. Furthermore, and as pointed out by Dr Omtzigt on Twitter, the Maltese delegation had not objected to the descriptions of various scandals which had been included in the report. https://twitter.com/PieterOmtzigt/status/1145422605152870401
Winding up, Justice Minister Owen Bonnici expressed his dismay that the Opposition had not said “a single word” about the Bill which was being debated.
Dr Azzopardi’s credibility had been best described by the Opposition Leader himself when he had publicly stated that he didn’t “have time to waste on Jason Azzopardi.”
He advised Dr Azzopardi to stop using the justice system as a political football to further his political ambitions, arguing that Dr Azzopardi was no longer taken seriously except by a few outside Malta.
Dr Azzopardi had been “delighted” by the outcome of the Council of Europe’s vote last week, as he had managed to promote a report which was “unjust” and “unfair” in its criticisms of Malta. What he had failed to mention was his wish for the Council of Europe to initiate monitoring procedures against Malta, a proposal to which the vast majority of representatives had objected. These procedures had only been initiated once, against Turkey.
Furthermore, he said, Azeri MPs had not defended Malta but their own country before the Parliamentary Assembly, objecting to what they called the report’s untrue characterisation of Azerbaijan.
Turning to the Venice Commission recommendations, he reiterated that criticisms concerning Attorney General Peter Grech’s continued tenure as chair of the FIAU would be addressed next March. Dr Grech’s appointment to the post was due to expire, and would not be renewed.
As for some of the other recommendations, Dr Bonnici expressed his belief that Dr Azzopardi would be the first to vote against the implementation of the recommendation that the Attorney General become responsible for what are presently known as magisterial inquiries.
Addressing criticisms concerning the composition of the judiciary, Dr Bonnic said the Labour government had promoted to judges, magistrates who had been appointed by the Nationalist Party. Unlike the Nationalist Party, it had not elevated the brother of a sitting Cabinet minister to the position of Chief Justice. If the present system for appointing judges was insufficient, what about the previous system, which was far worse?