EP resolution sceptical of presidential pardons in Caruana Galizia murder case
A draft text on European Parliament's resolution on rule of law in Malta casts doubts on the appropriateness of granting presidential pardon in exchange for state evidence
A draft text of next week’s European Parliament resolution on the rule of law in Malta and the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia casts doubt on the appropriateness of granting presidential pardons for turning state’s evidence on the case.
The text, which has been signed off on by all the European Parliament’s political groups but which is still open to amendments, expresses “concerns about the repeated offer and use of presidential pardons in the context of the murder trial” and stresses that “testimonies offered for other crimes should be very carefully assessed and should not be used to evade full justice for murder”.
The harsh tone on the pardons, however, was tempered by an acknowledgement that “a presidential pardon and plea bargain were two of the elements that led to the arrest in November 2019 of one of the individuals suspected of commissioning the assassination”.
This is one of a raft of concerns and recommendations MEPs have thrashed out at LIBE Committee stage.
While noting progress that has been made in the murder investigations, the resolution stresses that “recent revelations raise new questions about the case and related investigations”.
Such “recent revelations”, according to the text, include the “possible involvement of government ministers and political appointees” and make specific reference to allegations levelled in court to the effect that former economy minister Chris Cardona had been “involved in a plot to kill a journalist” and that current Minister within the Office of the Prime Minister Carmelo Abela “was involved in a major crime, sparking speculation about a million-euro heist of HSBC bank headquarters in Qormi in 2010 that led to a shoot-out with the police”.
The resolution, seen by MaltaToday, also refers directly to the uproar raised when news broke that former Parliamentary Secretary for Civil Rights and Reforms Rosianne Cutajar “accepted cash from the person charged with commissioning the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia [Yorgen Fenech], after she claimed to have acted as a broker on a projected property sale in 2019 [which never took place]”.
Moreover, MEPs have questioned whether it is appropriate that Cutajar is “only” being investigated by Commissioner for Standards in Public Life.
On former OPM chief of staff Keith Schembri, MEPs note how investigations in related cases of money laundering and corruption have seen some progress, but stress that “the latest testimonies and revelations have brought new suspicious facts and potential criminal acts to light”.
As such, they call on the Maltese authorities to launch and “advance investigations in these cases without delay”.
These advance investigations, the ongoing murder investigation and other related probes, according to MEPs, must have “the full and continuous involvement of Europol in all aspects of the murder investigation and all related investigations”.
Moreover, all such allegations of corruption and fraud, especially those concerning those in the upper echelons of government, “should be investigated and prosecuted with the appropriate rigour and at the appropriate level, including in relation to the possible involvement of foreign actors”.
The resolution furthermore calls on the Maltese authorities to treat, as an utmost priority, the fight against organised crime, corruption and the intimidation of journalists.
The resolution makes note of how “developments in Malta over the years have led to serious and persistent threats to the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights, including questions as to the freedom of the media, the independence of law enforcement and the judiciary from political interference, and the freedom of peaceful assembly.”
Expressing concern about “deep corruption patterns’ the draft text calls on the European Commission to “use all the tools and procedures at its disposal to ensure full compliance with EU law vis‑à‑vis the efficient functioning of judicial systems, the fight against money laundering, banking supervision, public procurement, and urban planning and development”.
While the resolution acknowledges how the assassination of Caruana Galizia triggered reforms to improve the protection of journalists and defend media freedom, it stresses that “the Maltese authorities should take further demonstrable steps, setting long-term legislative and policy measures that serve to ensure an environment for critical, independent journalism in Malta and the accountability of politicians and officials”.
The resolution, which will be up for a plenary vote next week, also calls on the government to address media freedom concerns, the independence of public media from political interference and the increasing use of hate speech on social media.
In terms of the ever-looming Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, the resolution calls for the Commission itself to propose EU-wide anti-SLAPP legislation in order to protect journalists from “vexatious lawsuits”.
On protecting investigative journalism, the resolution adds, “When fighting corruption and maladministration, investigative journalism should receive particular consideration and financial or fiscal support as a tool serving the public good, while underscoring the “need for rapid response mechanisms for violations of press and media freedom, as well as the cross-border investigative journalism fund”.
This article is part of a content series called Ewropej. This is a multi-newsroom initiative part-funded by the European Parliament to bring the work of the EP closer to the citizens of Malta and keep them informed about matters that affect their daily lives. This article reflects only the author’s view. The action was co-financed by the European Union in the frame of the European Parliament's grant programme in the field of communication. The European Parliament was not involved in its preparation and is, in no case, responsible for or bound by the information or opinions expressed in the context of this action. In accordance with applicable law, the authors, interviewed people, publishers or programme broadcasters are solely responsible. The European Parliament can also not be held liable for direct or indirect damage that may result from the implementation of the action.