Courts can scrutinise parliamentary procedure on PAC witnesses

The Constitutional Court has allowed the continuation of proceedings in the Court of Magistrates filed by one of the men charged with bribery in the Enemalta oil scandal, to contest the right of the Maltese parliament to submit him to a hearing in the public accounts committee.

In its decision, the Constitutional Court decided that the House of Representatives had to be regulated by the Constitution and that its rights and powers could be scrutinised, as far as fundamental rights were concerned, by a court of law.

The PAC has been hearing witnesses testifying on the National Audit Office’s report into the procurement of fuel at Enemalta, after eight people were charged on the strength of State’s evidence George Farrugia, the oil trader who devised a system of bribes for the supply of oil to the state corporation.

The story was broken by MaltaToday when it revealed Sammut was paid a ‘commission’ from Trafigura into a Gibraltar account for the supply of oil to Enemalta. Sammut is a former director of Enemalta’s bunkering arm.

Sammut is currently undergoing court proceedings, where he has been accused of corruption in the granting of oil procurement contracts.

In his appearance before the PAC, his lawyer Joe Giglio said the accused had the fundamental right to remain silent, and noted that the Speaker had ruled that co-accused Tancred Tabone had to appear before the committee but opt not to reply to questions which could incriminate him.

Giglio said he disagreed that when the witness, in this case the accused, refused to testify, matters had to be referred to the Speaker, whom he said could not decide what could incriminate the witness and he therefore intended to contest the ruling.

Two other accused, Francis Portelli and Anthony Cassar – formerly business partners of Sammut and Tancred Tabone – are also contesting the Speaker’s ruling on their appearance in the PAC in a similar court case.