Harbinson’s Houdini act

Jeremy Harbinson’s continued refusal to testify in court proceedings despite being the court-appointed expert in the Vitals hospitals corruption inquiry is seriously undermining the prosecution’s case.

Harbinson had been appointed by the inquiring magistrate as an expert to lead a team that carried out a forensic audit of companies linked to the hospitals concession. They evaluated money trails, bank statements, emails, company structures and ownership to produce a voluminous report that formed the basis upon which the magistrate recommended criminal action be taken against several individuals. These individuals included former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, his then chief of staff Keith Schembri, and former ministers Konrad Mizzi, Chris Fearne and Edward Scicluna among many other private individuals, public officials and companies.

As a court expert, Harbinson is obliged to testify about his report, if required to do so. Indeed, it is unprecedented that a court expert refuses to testify, even remotely. He has truly done a Houdini act—disappearing and leaving his audience bewildered by the audacity.

His protestations today that he was unaware of what was expected of him when accepting the job, sound hollow. Similarly hollow is his claim that he does not want to come to Malta because he fears for his safety. If this is the case, the magistrate can order all the protection measures needed to ensure Harbinson’s safety is assured at all times.

A story that appeared in Politico last week on corruption in Malta seemed to suggest that a purported 2022 break-in on Harbinson’s hotel room from where his passport was allegedly stolen was the reason why the expert feared for his safety. That story has not been corroborated by Harbinson himself apart from the fact that the expert had continued working on the Vitals magisterial inquiry for more than a year after that alleged incident.

If, however, Harbinson has been threatened in some way, the Maltese police must investigate the matter and get to the bottom of things. But this would necessarily require Harbinson to cooperate, something he appears unwilling to do.

The defence has a right to examine Harbinson as a witness and challenge his findings. If the defence is denied this opportunity it can argue for his findings to be expunged from the case on the basis that the accused would be denied a fair trial.

We are not yet at that stage and the prosecution should do everything within its power to try and get Harbinson to testify. If need be, an international arrest warrant should be issued.

But even in the eventuality that Harbinson’s report and conclusions are expunged, it does not mean the case against the accused is automatically dead in the water as some would want us to believe. We are nowhere near that stage.

The testimony of other experts still stands as do the documents and evidence collated throughout the magisterial inquiry. On the basis of the evidence in hand, the prosecution can still build its case without having to depend on Harbinson’s conclusions—a hard slog indeed and one that would exact every ounce of energy and wit from the Attorney General’s lawyers.

Whether this will be sufficient enough to get a conviction in all or some of the cases is another matter altogether. What is certain is that Harbinson’s antics have weakened the prosecution’s hand and made their life significantly more difficult, ensuring these criminal cases will drag on for more years to come.

In many ways it is a déjà vu of the Enemalta oil scandal, where the compilation of evidence against the main protagonists has dragged on for 12 years with no end in sight.

It is a shame that what is ostensibly the biggest case of money laundering, corruption and fraud, involving so many high-profile people, that has ever been brought in front of the Maltese courts should be prejudiced in such a way. It leaves a sour taste, muddying the political waters even more for longer.

The maxim ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ applies equally to the accused and the Maltese people, who deserve to have this ugly chapter brought to a close satisfactorily and in a just way. Our fear is that the matter will simply drag on ad infinitum until it becomes a caricature of a bad dream—where justice remains elusive and political fog reigns supreme.