Prime Minister Robert Abela has said he will not comment on a damning court decision involving Infrastructure Minister Ian Borg, until he has had time to appeal.
Taking reporter’s questions, Abela said Borg had a 20-day window in which to appeal the decision and it was not prudent to comment until that period had elapsed.
Last week a court ruled in a libel case that centred around Borg buying a plot of land in Rabat from a man with mental health issues at a price below market value. The court found that Borg’s testimony lacked “credibility”.
The libel suit revolved around a story published by The Malta Independent on Sunday, back in July 2015, titled ‘Family incensed as PS buys land from mentally-ill father’.
In its report the newspaper said that 66-year old Anthony Scicluna, a vulnerable person afflicted by mental health issues, had sold the property to Borg after a weekend-long drinking spree.
The libel suit was not instigated by Borg, but by the broker Mark Farrugia, who is Scicluna’s nephew.
Borg was only called to testify on the case.
What was the case about?
Asked by Times of Malta on Monday for a reaction on the exploitation claims, as well as the court’s conclusion that his testimony lacking credibility, Borg referred journalists to a video uploaded to his Facebook page.
The Malta Independent reported that Scicluna had sold the plot of 655 square metres of land in the Santa Katerina valley area for €10,000, and his relatives claimed the sale had been “rushed through” just hours after Scicluna was allegedly taken bar-hopping across Rabat and Dingli by his nephew, Mark Farrugia and another man, Franco Sammut.
The man had allegedly returned home in the very early hours of Monday morning, showered, changed his clothes and been accompanied straight to a notary’s office to sign the final deed of sale.
One of the brokers of the deal who was acting on behalf of Borg had subsequently filed a libel suit against the news outlet.
The libel claim against the Malta Independent was finally thrown out last Tuesday.
Asked by Times of Malta for a reaction on the exploitation claims, as well as the court’s conclusion that his testimony lacking credibility, Borg referred journalists to a video uploaded to his Facebook page.
How has Ian Borg reacted?
The video Borg refers to is a 12-minute-long clip of the minister speaking to journalists and addressing the issue on the same day that the libel suit was thrown out. The journalists’ question that Borg is responding to cannot be heard in the uploaded clip.
In his answer, Borg says that while it was not his responsibility as the buyer to ensure that the person he had bought the land from was sound of mind, he said that from the three contracts Borg had signed with Scicluna and other members of his family, only one was in dispute.
“The reality is I signed three contracts with this person, the first with him, his mother and 14 siblings, a second between him, the property broker (sensar) and the notary and a third one between him and his mother and siblings again,” Borg said.
He goes on to say that the second contract was being contested due to issues within the family.
“So the argument is that during this specific contract, that is between me, this person and the broker, the seller was not in a proper mental state, however he was fine six months before during the first contract and six months after that when the third contract was signed. It is not up to the buyer to decide on the mental capacity of the seller at the time.
“This is simply family infighting put in the spotlight just because the buyer happens to be the minister. I know there are political agendas at play here and it’s just another opportunity to take pot shots at the minister.”
Borg added that Scicluna’s family had tried to file a power of attorney over him, however their request was denied by the courts.
He said that he had since spoken to Scicluna who reportedly told him to ignore the claims made by his family members and that he was upset by the attempt to seek power of attorney over him.