Adrian Delia accuses Attorney General of helping ministers avoid testifying about Egrant inquiry report

Opposition leader says only people being denied access to the Egrant inquiry report were himself and the rest of the people of Malta and Gozo

Adrian Delia wants ministers to testify over court replies they gave, which suggested they had access to full Egrant inquiry report
Adrian Delia wants ministers to testify over court replies they gave, which suggested they had access to full Egrant inquiry report

Opposition leader Adrian Delia has accused the Attorney General of helping ministers to avoid testifying about the Egrant inquiry.

Speaking on the steps of the courthouse in Valletta this afternoon, Delia said it was clear that the only people being denied access to the inquiry report were himself “and the rest of the people of Malta and Gozo”.

Delia was flanked by PN secretary general Clyde Puli and candidates Errol Cutajar and Janice Chetcuti.

Delia had just filed his reply to a court application filed by ministers Edward Scicluna, Konrad Mizzi and Chris Cardona in which they requested the revocation of a decree ordering them to testify.

The AG once again had to put on two hats to defend the ministers who wanted to hide the truth from the people of Malta, Delia said.

“It is shameful that the three witnesses… who had been notified on 26 August, left until a few days before the sitting of the 14 October to table this application,” Delia said, quoting from the reply filed in court today.

The witnesses have no legal standing in the proceedings and could not request the revocation of a decree, argued Delia’s lawyers Vincent Galea and Andre Portelli.

Besides this, there was a decree prior to the one impugned by the witnesses, which also compelled them to testify, said the lawyers.

It was clear what they were required to testify about and their arguments to the contrary had no juridical basis, read the court application.

“Whatever the applicant witnesses say, the point remains clear and unequivocal. In their replies in the acts of the inquiry, they cited passages from the Egrant inquiry, which passages are not found in the conclusions published by the Attorney General for public consumption. The question that the witnesses must answer from the witness stand are clear: where did the cited passage come from?”

The reply may have implications on the constitutional proceedings. The magisterial proceedings, pending or otherwise, have nothing to do with this, said the lawyers.

“We have already seen how this Egrant Inquiry is accessible to the Prime Minister, ministers and the head of government communications, aside from other people close to the present government. With this evidence, the plaintiff wishes to continue to show how the actions of the AG breached and continue to breach his fundamental rights,” Delia’s lawyers argued.

More in Court & Police