Pilatus Bank investigation to be presented following Muscat’s defamation against Caruana Galizias

A court has granted a request from Daphne Caruana Galizia’s heirs for a copy of the document verbal processing prepared in the context of the Pilatus Bank investigation, to be entered as evidence in Joseph Muscat’s defamation proceedings against them.

That document was the final piece of evidence sought by the murdered journalist’s husband and sons in their attempt to defend themselves against defamation claims brought by the former prime minister following a story published by Caruana Galizia in 2017.

That article first appeared in her Running commentary blog, the journalist claimed that the secretive offshore company Egrant belonged to Muscat’s wife, Michelle.

That story prompted Muscat to request a magistrate inquiry to investigate these claims.

The investigation, conducted by then magistrate Aaron Bugeja, concluded that there was no documentation linking Muscat’s family to Panama’s secretive company, with the British-based forensic accounting firm appointed to assist in the investigation, and could not find any evidence linking the Muscats. to Egrant Inc on the servers of the now closed Pilatus Bank.

After the murder of Caruana Galizia in October 2017, Muscat testified in the defamation proceedings, stating that he would drop the cases against the journalist and her son Matthew if the heirs accepted the conclusions of the Egrant investigation.

The Caruana Galizia family refused to do so, saying they would not bow to “extortion of our officials”.

Last year, the journalist’s son testified that they could not defend themselves against Muscat’s defamation claims because the main witness was dead and her heirs did not have access to her sources.

“We need a miracle or my mother will come back to life to free herself from that prejudice,” Matthew Caruana Galizia had said.

The family’s lawyer, Joseph Zammit Maempel, then filed a request for the verbal processing at the Pilate investigation to be submitted as evidence.

Muscat’s lawyer Pawlu Lia had objected, arguing that the request was simply intended to further prolong the proceedings.

The court, presided over by Magistrate Victor George Axiaq, issued a chamber decree granting the defendants’ request and ordering that the Registrar of the Civil Courts be summoned to produce the document.

Since “evidence may have been gathered” during the Pilatus investigation that could be relevant to the subject of the defamation, verbal processing had to be submitted, the magistrate ruled.

‘Anyone who makes Pilatus research information public comes across as a hero’

On Monday, Muscat’s lawyer questioned that decision, pointing to a recent decision by Judge Toni Abela in the opposition Vitals case, in which the judge strongly criticized the leak of criminal records.

Such leakage of secret court documents was open to prosecution, Lia pointed out, quoting Judge Abela on the subject.

Criminal records were only accessible to the public if they were read out in open court.

“This verbal processing (about Pilatus Bank) has not been read in any courtroom to date, as far as I know,” Lia argued, drawing a comparison with the Egrant investigation.

In that case, the conclusions were made public and related to Muscat’s smears against Caruana Galizia.

“The other verbal processing (about Pilatus Bank) has nothing to do with this story.”

Furthermore, “the person who made the allegations had testified before the magistrate three times in the Egrant Inquiry and said everything she had to say about it. So the verbal processing should not shed any further light on what she said at the time,” Lia continued.

‘That is your opinion. The court does not agree with this,” said magistrate Axiaq.

“What is the reason for this request? What is the purpose of evidence,” Muscat’s lawyer asked.

“Be reasonable,” said the magistrate. “After all, this case was filed urgently. It is also in the interest of your customers. There may be some evidence coming out of the Pilatus Bank verbal processing.”

Lawyer Joseph Zammit Maempel, who represented the defendants, pointed out that the Pilatus investigation would be presented in an ongoing civil suit filed by NGO Repubblika against the Attorney General.

Madam Justice Doreen Clarke granted Repubblika’s request to that effect and the investigation would be presented at the next meeting in mid-June.

Meanwhile, the defendants called former Repubblika President Robert Aquilina to testify about the Pilatus investigation.

“Notary Aquilina is present outside,” Zammit Maempel informed the court.

But Muscat’s lawyer again cited Judge Abela.

“Legally, he (Aquilina) cannot testify because if he claims that he obtained this (his information) from (the Pilatus investigation), that means he broke the law,” Lia said.

“Now the person who made that information public comes across as a hero,” the lawyer continued, promptly reprimanded by the magistrate who pointed out that such comments would not be tolerated.

“Why is this verbal processing relevant to this case,” Lia repeated.

“Because what happened at Pilatus Bank is a reflection of Egrant,” Zammit Maempel replied.

The court adjourned the case until July so that the clerk can provide a copy of the Pilatus report on a USB stick.

Lawyer Peter Caruana Galizia also represented the suspects.