Decree found circumstantial evidence linking Joseph Muscat to money laundering, court hears

A police superintendent has told a judge that the police had searched the residence of disgraced former prime minister Joseph Muscat last January after a magistrate decreed that there was enough evidence to show that Muscat could be involved in money laundering and corruption.

This emerged from testimony given by Superintendent James Grech, who took the witness stand this morning in the constitutional case filed by Muscat after his bid to remove magistrate Gabriella Vella from the inquiry into the Vitals hospital contract was rejected.

Muscat, who did not attend today's sitting, claims that he will suffer a fundamental rights breach if the magistrate is not removed, after she refused Muscat’s request to recuse herself on the basis of Facebook comments posted by her father and brother.

The magistrate’s brother, Massimo Vella and father, Aldo Vella, both lawyers, also testified before Madam Justice Doreen Clarke this morning.

Massimo Vella began by putting his comments in context. “On February 24 this year, Mr. Justice Francesco Depasquale handed down judgement in a case filed by Adrian Delia, cancelling the concession of three public hospitals to Vitals,” he said.

“Delia, who had been an MP at the time, had filed that case on the strength of a particular legal disposition which allows an MP to attack a concession which was not in conformity with the law. He did so and won.

“Lawyer Anna Mallia had published a Facebook post saying that Delia would not have been able to file that case had it not been for a legal amendment made by this government.”

The witness explained that while Facebook posts turn up in search results but Facebook comments are not searchable. “My comment was ‘ so you’re saying well done to Labour for introducing a law to solve a mix-up (taħwida) of its own making.”

Another reply, written by a third party, suggested that it was “not a mix up but massive fraud,” he added.

“It is clear that this word taħwida makes no implication or allegation of fraud. …my comment solely criticised the logic used by Anna Mallia…[that] there is an unhappy situation which led to the recission of a contract.”

“Mr. Justice Depasquale had been clear in stating that he had found no indication of fraud on the government’s part, saying that at most there was artifice.”

“By no stretch of the imagination did what I was speaking about allege criminal wrongdoing by anyone. I only disagreed with Mallia.”

Gouder asked what the mix-up he referred to was. Vella replied that this was on the contract rescinded by the court.

 “The recission of a contract is never a nice thing…much more when dealing with a concession for public hospitals.”

Fending off questions from Gouder about specific parts of the contract,  Vella said he had no access to the contract. “You are asking me about a contract which I read about in the newspapers and in the judgement, which I had downloaded.”

“I believe the Prime Minister at the time was Joseph Muscat. But I did not single anyone out because I didn’t know what direct involvement he had in the contract. What I knew is that there was a contract that was rescinded and the circumstances leading to its recission.”

Replying to Gouder’s questions about the side agreement, Vella repeated that he had no access to the contract itself. “What I heard and read in the news was that there was a clause binding the government to pay a penalty of €100 million if it withdrew from the contract.”

Gouder asked who signed the contract. “I have absolutely no idea. I know it is a government representative. I only know about it thanks to the newspapers and to be honest it always struck me as odd to have that clause.” The clause was added as an addendum, said the witness, but didn’t know whether it was added under Muscat or Abela.

“I can assume what the entities involved were, because I work in that field, but who the signatories were, I have absolutely no idea.”

He insisted that his post was not an attack on any particular individual. “What I know is the same as every other person in Malta can learn from the public domain.

“These comments of mine were never discussed with Magistrate Gabriella Vella nor do we discuss anything vaguely connected to her job.”

“We’re lucky if we get to meet three or four times a year and when we do we talk about family matters. We never discuss work. She doesn’t say anything and nobody asks her anything. It is very clear and simple. These are only my opinions and were never discussed with the magistrate.”

The witness also hit back at allegations made by Muscat in his regard. “Joseph Muscat published his court application and in it, I noted a number of allegations. For example, that my father and I are political activists. I never had any involvement in politics in my entire life. I always kept my distance. I never attended a political rally, or appeared on a party TV station, nor been a paid up member of any party. My only involvement in politics is voting,”  said the lawyer. “Muscat’s reference is completely incorrect.”

His sister was appointed to the Bench in 2009 or 10, he said in reply to another question. “We never worked as a team at my father’s law firm, we both had separate caseloads and worked separately…Even our clientele was separate.”

“Then in 2009/10, she was selected for magistrate, and basically she went West, I went East.”

Gouder asked whether he knew that the magistrate was inquiring into any related matters. “There is an inquiry which I learned of through the newspapers in which I understand a number of people are being investigated over some type of crime in connection with the hospitals. I know that magistrate Gabriella Vella is the inquiring magistrate.

“What I wrote is not connected to the inquiry. It was simply a critique of the logic employed by Anna Mallia. My point was : I am sorry but I cannot agree with you. It had nothing to do with the inquiry, but only to do with the judgement handed down by Depasquale.”

Gouder suggested that the witness had said he knew that the issue was not being investigated by the inquiry, asking how he got to know this.

“Simply because what I wrote about was not of a criminal nature…What is investigated by magisterial inquiries are matters of a criminal nature…The two issues are separate. There is a criminal inquiry which I don’t know anything about, bar what was mentioned in the press and on social media. I wrote about the [separate] civil matter regarding the hospitals contract.”

“My reply to Mallia’s post about the Government Lands Act is about the Government Lands Act,” Vella explained. “The solution to the issue we were talking about was provided in the Government Lands Act. The mechanism is in the Government Lands Act and the solution is the dissolution of the contract. By no stretch of the imagination was I, or Mallia for that matter, discussing issues of a criminal nature.”

But Gouder insisted on pressing on that line of questioning. “How did you get to know whether this mix up was fraudulent or not? What did you understand by the word taħwida?”

“The word taħwida was used,” Vella replied, “ because someone had replied to my comment to say that it was not a mix-up but massive fraud. He felt the need to correct me but I did not reply to him. I said nothing and did not comment.”

“You also uploaded another post later,” Gouder went on.

“It dealt with the penalty clause. At the time [Chris] Fearne had said we needed to be careful because of the clause and I then criticised that particular clause. It jars in my mind. A potestative clause.”

A potestative clause is a type of provision in a contract that allows one party to cancel or annul the agreement unilaterally if certain conditions are not met.

Gouder asked how he knew about the penalty clause. Vella repeated that he knew of this clause from public sources. “You are asking me about a clause which I never saw, in a contract that I never read, in an investigation that I never had access to.”

“With all due respect you did not understand my answer. The investigation in the criminal sphere is one thing and I am talking about the civil issue. I believe the civil issue is not being judged by a court of criminal judicature. I was only objecting to Mallia’s logic.”

“I say again. I said no because I spoke specifically about a civil matter and I understand that a court of criminal judicature does not deal with these issues. I am not saying there isn’t a criminal investigation, that’s [already been published] in the papers. I am speaking as a lawyer.”

“What do I know? I know that at some point someone signed an addendum, I don’t know in what epoch, and my understanding of [the addendum] is that if the contract is dissolved the government must pay a €100 million penalty.”

Cross-examined by State Advocate lawyer James D’Agostino, the witness said he didn’t live with his father and neither did his sister, who lived in a different town.

The witness reiterated that he had never discussed any aspects of his sister’s work in any way. He corrected the misconception that there were several posts.

“There was one post, Anna Mallia’s.” The rest were replies to it. A post is searchable but a comment is not, he said. Anna Mallia said words to the effect of ‘don’t forget that this government introduced this law’ and I said that there is nothing noteworthy about it. The government was not a party and the mechanism had been used by someone else - Adrian Delia.”

Earlier in the sitting, Police Superintendent James Grech exhibited a copy of the court decree, ordering the police to conduct the search at Joseph Muscat’s house.

Muscat’s lawyer, Charlon Gouder asked the witness to explain why the search had happened.

“Because there is sufficient evidence to show that Joseph Muscat could be involved in money laundering and corruption,” said the witness, reading from the decree itself.

State Advocate lawyer James Agostino cross-examined, suggesting that it was carried out to preserve any potential evidence of a crime. The witness agreed.

“I wanted to affirm my belief that corruption is wrong, but I repeat that I did not pass judgement on anyone,” the magistrate's father, Aldo Vella, said when it was his turn to testify.

“I know that my daughter is carrying out the Vitals inquiry, but I assure you that I never spoke to her about it nor tried to influence her. Not in this or any other investigation. I want to be clear.”

The witness said he received no information from his daughter, be it direct or indirect. Neither did he participate in any protests, he added.

The case will continue next month.