Court rules against half-a-million-euro confiscation in money laundering appeal

The Court of Criminal Appeal has upheld a confiscation order of €116,129 against Charmaine Bezzina who is convicted of money laundering, confirming an earlier judgment that the amount represented the proceeds of her criminal activity.

Ultimately the court dismissed the Attorney General’s appeal seeking to increase the confiscation order to €529,834, finding that the larger sum did not reflect the actual financial benefit derived from the offences.

The appeal follows last year's conviction of Charmaine Bezzina, who was found guilty of laundering more than €116,000 generated through criminal activity linked to drug trafficking and prostitution.

Although the Criminal Court described the offences as serious, it noted Bezzina's ‘significant’ rehabilitation from drug and gambling addiction, placing her under a three-year probation order. It also imposed 400 hours of community service and ordering the confiscation of €116,129.

The appeal centred solely on the value of the confiscation order. It was argued that more than €529,834 that had passed through Bezzina's casino gambling activity should also have been considered proceeds of crime and therefore confiscated.

The Court of Appeal disagreed.

It held that while the law permits the confiscation of assets derived directly or indirectly from criminal activity, the amount cannot be increased simply because the same money repeatedly circulated through gambling transactions. The court explained that the relevant consideration is the actual financial benefit obtained from the criminal conduct.

It concluded that the higher figure represented funds repeatedly recycled through casino gaming rather than additional criminal profits. The evidence also showed that Bezzina had suffered substantial gambling losses, meaning the larger amount could not be regarded as proceeds of crime.

The appeal also challenged the Criminal Court's acquittal of Bezzina on one fraud-related charge concerning social security benefits.

However, the Court of Appeal found no reason to interfere with that finding, observing that the evidence did not establish that Bezzina had been ineligible to receive the benefits in question.

Finding no legal or factual errors in the original judgment, the Court of Criminal Appeal confirmed the confiscation order of €116,129 and dismissed the appeal.

Defence Lawyer David Gatt represented Charmaine Bezzina.

Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera presided over the case.