Two board members whose role in a public inquiry into Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder has been disputed have refused to weigh in on objections raised by the slain journalist’s family.
Following months of pressure by the Council of Europe, the government announced a three-man inquiry board chaired by former judge Michael Mallia.
Legal scholar Ian Refalo and NGO commissioner Anthony Abela Medici were both appointed to sit on the board.
The family were quick to dispute their roles, arguing that a proper inquiry demands that the board’s wider members have no financial or political links to the current political administration.
Prof. Refalo has acted as a lawyer for the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit (FIAU) and has also represented Allied Newspapers Ltd former managing director Adrian Hillman, whom Ms Caruana Galizia wrote about extensively in the Panama Papers leak.
Muscat meets with family over inquiry
When contacted about the family’s concerns, Prof. Refalo said it would be “highly inappropriate” to comment about the matter at this stage.
Dr Abela Medici’s role has also been questioned, particularly by NGO Repubblika, due to his lack of expertise in the area and his links to the executive by virtue of his government-appointed role as NGO Commissioner.
A spokeswoman for Dr Abela Medici said the commissioner was not in a position to reply to Times of Malta’s questions without the consent of the public board of inquiry.
The spokeswoman did, however, point out two legal provisions in the Voluntary Organisations Act, stating that appointing a person as NGO Commissioner does not make them a public officer and that somebody who is a public officer or becomes one will be ineligible for the post.
The Prime Minister last night revealed in Parliament he had met the family of Ms Caruana Galizia and their legal representatives to discuss the public inquiry.
Asked about the outcome of that meeting on Monday, the Prime Minister refused to comment.
Ms Caruana Galizia’s family also declined to comment when contacted.
The Council of Europe’s legal affairs and human rights committee declared in October that the public inquiry as set up did not meet the assembly’s expectations.
Dutch MP Pieter Omtzigt, who compiled a report about the assassination for the Council of Europe, has expressed his fears that the public inquiry’s wording could be interpreted to exclude scrutiny of political office-holders, and to make it possible for hearings to be held behind closed doors without sufficient justification.