Mifsud files libel case against Caruana Galizia

The deputy governor of the Central Bank of Malta says he shouldn’t  be expected to prove his innocence, insists on accusers proving their allegations

Alfred Mifsud
Alfred Mifsud

Alfred Mifsud has filed a libel case against Daphne Caruana Galizia, after she accused him of corruption and money laundering in an article on her blog ‘Running Commentary’.

In a statement, Mifsud said that he explained to the said blog ‘that their sources are untrustworthy and motivated by revenge and hate from a failed personal relationship (after refusing unreasonable demands for financial settlement)’.

He said he was left with no option but to file for libel.

“With 47 years uninterrupted experience in financial services without ever being accused of impropriety, I cannot be expected to prove my innocence, rather than the accusers proving their allegations.”

Caruana Galizia had alleged that Mifsud, the deputy governor of the Central Bank of Malta, received €2,750 a month for about 18 months from Philip Morris International to act as a middleman or go-between with the former European Union Health Commissioner John Dalli, who was not allowed to have private and unlogged meetings with the company.

Daphne Caruana Galizia made the allegations on her blog 'Running Commentary'
Daphne Caruana Galizia made the allegations on her blog 'Running Commentary'

The blog said that PMI terminated the agreement with Mifsud after Dalli was forced to resign in October 2012 over allegations that he was aware of a bribe offered in connection with the revision of the Tobacco Products Directive, allegations that Dalli always strenuously denied.

According to the blog, Mifsud – whose role was to convey information and messages between Dalli and PMI – also travelled as PMI’s guest to football matches and other events.

Mifsud apparently told EurActiv that he took money from PMI, but said that it was “as a consultant”. When asked what the cigarette manufacturer consulted him on concerning Malta, he replied that it was “local markets, the tobacco industry and the class action legislation that was going through parliament at the time”.