Caruana Galizia public inquiry: OPM communications chief quizzed over detention of journalists in Castille
OPM communications chief and former L-Orizzont editor take witness stand, ex-OPM official Neville Gafà asked to testify during next sitting due to lack of time for questioning • Follow our live blog of proceedings here
The public inquiry into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia continued this afternoon with OPM communications head Matthew Carbone and former L-Orizzont editor Josef Caruana having testified.
Carbone, who was previously deputy head of communications before being appointed head in August 2019, told the board that his role at Castille was strictly limited to communications.
He was quizzed by the board over the events which transpired during the night of 28 November and early morning of 29 November 2019, when journalists were blocked from leaving Castille after then prime minister Joseph Muscat had held a press conference amid the political crisis triggered by revelations emerging from the investigation into Caruana Galizia's murder.
Carbone insisted that journalists had never been locked in Castille, and that it was normal practice for the prime minister to be given time to leave the venue before members of the press are let out.
Carbone was also asked to identify the names of security staff who were in Castille at the time preventing journalists from leaving. Carbone and his lawyer Charlon Gouder initially objected to the giving of names when shown photos. The communications chief, however, eventually did identify the persons whom he recognised when pressed to do so by the inquiry board.
The bulk of the testimony of Caruana - a former editor of pro-Labour news outlet l-Orizzont who was later employed by the OPM, before contesting the 2019 MEP elections on a Labour ticket - concerned the harsh language he had used in his writings concerning Caruana Galizia.
Caruana had also penned a notorious editorial in L-Orizzont that had called for the purging of journalists who criticised the Labour government and written stories about government corruption.
Asked about the strong language he employed, Caruana told the board that, in instances where he had been rebuked by the government for certain things he wrote, he had apologised.
Neville Gafà to testify on Wednesday
Neville Gafà was also due to take the witness stand and was present in court, but he was asked by the inquiry board to return during the next sitting on Wednesday, since there wasn't enough time for his questioning.
Gafà will most likely face questions for his confrontational relationship with the journalist in his nebulous role in the previous administration.
On the eve of her assassination, he had uploaded a photo taken by a person stalking Caruana Galizia.
Gafà was allegedly involved in a Libyan medical visas racket when working as a envoy for the Office of the Prime Minister. He continued to court controversy when, in November last year, he held held unofficial meetings with a Libyan warlord, Haithem Tajouri, posing as the prime minister’s special envoy.
Last week's sitting
During last week's sitting, the inquiry heard the testimony of journalists Caroline Muscat, Monique Agius and Miguela Xuereb, who described incidents of harassment by PL supporters. Muscat said that this tied in with an OPM-orchestrated disinformation campaign.
At that sitting, the inquiry also heard how businessman Paul Apap Bologna had tried selling the gas power station plan to the Nationalist government in 2009 but secretary-general of the day, lawyer Paul Borg Olivier, had rejected the plan.
Four years later, a plan very similar to the one Borg Olivier had been shown, was presented by the Labour Party as part of its energy plan for the 2013 election campaign.
The public inquiry, which is being conducted by three retired judges, is entrusted with the task of determining whether any wrongful action or omission by or within any State entity could have facilitated the assassination of Caruana Galizia or failed to prevent it, and particularly whether the State knew or should have known of risks to the journalist’s life at the time of her murder.