Court lifts asset freeze order on Yorgen Fenech

Updated with Justice Ministry reaction 

A Maltese court has lifted the freeze on Yorgen Fenech’s assets, which was imposed on him after his 2019 arrest.

Fenech is awaiting trial for allegedly masterminding the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.

Judge Edwina Grima, set to preside over Fenech’s trial, ordered the cancellation of the asset freeze earlier this month, citing a failure by the Attorney General’s office to quantify the frozen assets by the required deadline.

A public notice of this decision was posted on the Asset Recovery Bureau’s website.

A spokesperson for the Attorney General’s office declined to comment, citing a court order issued by the same judge that prohibits any commentary or reporting on the murder case beyond what is publicly stated in court.

In comments to Times of Malta, the office of the Attorney General only said that “justice” is being actively pursued, a goal which they believe is “shared” by all

Fenech, who has been in preventative custody for five years, faces additional charges, including a “phantom job” for Melvin Theuma, money-laundering involving a gaming company, and illicit weapons transactions on the dark web. 

He also remains a suspect in a corruption inquiry involving former officials Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi. Fenech denies all charges.

Opposition slams Attorney General’s ‘incompetence’

Reacting to the announcement, the Nationalist Party slammed Attorney General Victoria Buttigieg’s “incompetence” and “misconduct”.

“This recent development is even more serious when considering that the proceedings before the Criminal Court involve Yorgen Fenech, the owner of the corrupt company 17 Black and the individual accused in court of masterminding the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia,” Opposition Justice spokesperson Karol Aquilina said. “This grave situation is also the result of poor legislation that Jonathan Attard, as Minister for Justice, passed through Parliament and his blind trust in Victoria Buttigieg.”

He said the PN expects Jonathan Attard and Victoria Buttigieg to immediately take responsibility and step down from their respective positions. “This is the only honourable path left for Jonathan Attard and Victoria Buttigieg.”

He said the PN reminds and emphasises that it had warned that the changes proposed by the Government regarding anti-money laundering laws were rushed and would weaken institutions, “benefitting only criminals.”

“Now everyone knows that the priority of the Labour Government is to appease those involved in corruption, money laundering, and abuse of power,” he said.

‘The actions of a mafia state’ – Repubblika

Also slamming the decision, NGO Repubblika said this was possible because the Attorney General failed to enforce the law.

“Attorney General Victoria Buttigieg did not apply the law, and by failing to do her duty, Yorgen Fenech regained his temporarily frozen assets. This is a serious failure by the Maltese state. Minister Jonathan Attard changed the law, and Attorney General Victoria Buttigieg did not enforce it,” the NGO said. “If this was a genuine mistake (which we do not believe it was), Jonathan Attard and Victoria Buttigieg should resign immediately. If it was not a genuine mistake, then this is the action of a mafia state.”

Justice ministry reacts

Reacting to the Nationalist Party’s statement, the Justice Ministry “strongly” refuted its “baseless accusation” that recent amendments to various laws on criminal proceeds have weakened the country’s institutions.

“Without delving into the specifics of any particular case and in respect of the Court's prohibition order on the case referenced in the Opposition’s statement, the Ministry wishes to clarify that following amendments to laws governing criminal proceeds, institutions now have the authority to determine the value of criminal proceeds in order for a seizure or freezing order to take effect or remain in place. This process is conducted through the courts, with the final decision resting on the evidence presented before the Court,” the ministry said.

It insisted such legal amendments were made to achieve greater proportionality in orders of sequestration, freezing, and confiscation, in line with the criteria set out in judgments by the European Court of Human Rights.