Caruana Galizia public inquiry: Muscat administration’s ‘impunity spread from highest echelons like an octopus’

A public inquiry that heard witnesses from the Maltese government, the press and public on the events that led up to the assassination of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, has said the State has to bear responsibility for her death for having “created an atmosphere of impunity, generated by the highest echelons at the heart of Castille and which, like an octopus, spread to other entities and regulators and the Police, leading to the collapse of rule of law.”

The public inquiry was launched on request of the Caruana Galizia family in late 2019 just weeks before the arrest of Tumas magnate Yorgen Fenech, the man accused of masterminding the assassination, which prompted first the resignation of his business partner, Keith Schembri, chief of staff to former prime minister Joseph Muscat. The events led to the resignation of Muscat soon after.

The three-judge panel accused the Muscat administration of having failed to take measures to curtail its overweening powers, which “by judiciousness and reason, it was expected to take to avoid this risk.”

18:55 ADPD: ‘The state rendered a servant of the mafia’

The Green Party’s Chairperson Carmel Cacopardo said this report needs to mark a turning point in our country’s political, social, cultural and legal development.

“The report details a harrowing account of state failure and state capture. The main takeaway from today’s report is that the Mafia exists. The Mafia not simply as a criminal organisation but also as a cultural mindset that allows such an organisation to take root and prosper. We must strengthen our state to combat the Mafia.”

“We call for: the immediate implementation of the legislative and procedural recommendations contained in the inquiry’s report, starting with the development of new laws and institutions to combat the Mafia; .

100% transparency in the links between politics and business - the board is clear that links between business and politics must be monitored and regulated. .

Strengthening of Maltese investigative journalism, including through a reform of Malta’s media law, strengthening of the legal regime for freedom of information requests and a greater allocation of resources to investigate threats and violence against our journalists; .

Strengthening Whistleblowing legislation, ensuring that it is effective and not controlled by political strings effective regulation of lobbying through clear specific legislation; .

A root and branch reform of the Maltese institution involved in the investigation and prosecution of high-level crime - it is clear that Malta’s investigative institutions have failed and continue to fail in respect of the investigation and prosecution of high level crime and corruption; .

Accountability at all levels from all players identified as having participated or acquiesced in creating the climate and conditions that ultimately led to Caruana Galizia’s assassination - this includes accountability from the heads of regulatory authorities identified in the inquiry’s report as having been pliant.” .

Matthew Vella

18:38 The Caruana Galizia family has issued the following statement: “The inquiry’s findings confirm the conviction our family held from the moment Daphne was assassinated: that her assassination was a direct result of the collapse of the rule of law and the impunity that the State provided to the corrupt network she was reporting on. We hope that its findings will lead to the restoration of the rule of law in Malta, effective protection for journalists, and an end to the impunity that the corrupt officials Daphne investigated continue to enjoy. Daphne and her work will live on in ensuring that the recommendations of this Inquiry effect lasting change.”

The Maltese Government only agreed to establish the public inquiry, over two years after the assassination, under threat of legal proceedings from the family and in the face of international pressure. The Inquiry’s findings intensify the pressure on Malta to enact wholesale reform in order to protect the lives of journalists and other critics of the abuse of state power.

“This report is a landmark in the campaign to ensure that the Maltese State is held accountable for its positive obligation to protect journalists. We call on the Government to accept the recommendations of the Inquiry and 2/2 to publish its plan of action without delay. This is a historic opportunity to ensure real change for the safety of journalists and to a process of national healing following the traumatic assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia on 16 October 2017.” Matthew Vella

17:46 And that concludes our live blogging of the inquiry report. The three remaining chapters deal with the Terms of Reference. The full report can be read by downloading the document attached to this webpage, while you can read our further coverage on our website.
For more about the conclusions and recommendations by the Board, you can read Matthew Agius’s article on the legal changes being proposed , and James Debono’s story on the suggestions being made to protect journalists
You can also read our coverage on statements made by Opposition leader Bernard Grech and former PM Joseph Muscat . The Prime Minister will be holding a press conference at 5:45pm. Nicole Meilak

17:37 On Keith Schembri, the Board gives an overview of his testimony during the public inquiry hearings. Their final conclusion: "Schembri’s figure as the not-so-hidden hand that controls power, at the relevant time with all that that implies, certainly cannot be discarded. The full truth in this regard remains to be seen." Nicole Meilak

17:28 “It was the police’s obligation not only to extend maximum protection, but also and perhaps more so to actively and urgently investigate the allegations being made and the people involved. The then Commissioner of Police and other officers of the Corps admit that neither was done.” Nicole Meilak

17:26 “It was from the evidence that emerged from the Panama Papers and eventually from the disclosure of the existence of 17 Black that Caruana Galizia ascertained beyond a shadow of a doubt that she was taking on an essentially corrupt system involving the exercise of the best two powers in the country, the political and the economic. In disclosing the facts that resonated in the country, she gave a clear warning to anyone seriously involved in this system that with her revelations, Caruana Galizia was endangering not only large individual projects but also exposed them to the risk of serious, perhaps fatal, consequences leading to bankruptcy as the Electrogas project was approaching. But worse, it was endangering the same comfortable system from which the people involved were gaining advantages.” Nicole Meilak

17:17 "“What has been revealed in the Panama Papers and in the FIAU report on the foreign society 17 Black must of course be verified by the competent authorities. It is a testament, however, to the mentality of association and closeness between some businessmen and public administrators who together aim to ensure that, while working to carry out large investment projects for the country, they advance their interests.” Nicole Meilak

17:11 The Board deems the Prime Minister’s defence of Keith Schembri, all the way until Schembri was arrested in connection with the murder, as “unacceptable, reprehensible behaviour and constitutes serious misconduct and abuse in the exercise of his functions as head government and guarantor of good governance”. Nicole Meilak

17:07 On the Panama Papers, the Board says that it shows the lack of will among State institutions to investigate allegations of improper conduct made by investigative journalists. On Muscat’s choice to keep Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi in government, the Board said as follows:
”The severity of the case required that even if there was no certainty about the alleged irregularity at that stage, the people involved should have been forced to take a step back until their position was clarified. Failure to do so sent a message that these people were not only able to act above the law without suffering the consequences, but also that they had the protection if not the blessing of the Prime Minister.”
The Board argues that this message led anyone to believe that they could get away with large-scale projects and land grabs, even in violation of rules and laws, so long as those projects were piloted by Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri, for they exercised unbridled power and were willing to use it if necessary. Nicole Meilak

17:01 On the Panama Papers, the Board says that it shows the lack of will among State institutions to investigate allegations of improper conduct made by investigative journalists. On Muscat’s choice to keep Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi in government, the Board said as follows:
”The severity of the case required that even if there was no certainty about the alleged irregularity at that stage, the people involved should have been forced to take a step back until their position was clarified. Failure to do so sent a message that these people were not only able to act above the law without suffering the consequences, but also that they had the protection if not the blessing of the Prime Minister.” Nicole Meilak

16:52 The next chapter, and the last one in this section, centres around the Panama Papers. Salient points to come shortly. Nicole Meilak

16:50 The Board notes that Chris Cardona, a former minister, said that he was being framed for having been involved in the murder, referencing a letter that was allegedly sent to Yorgen Fenech by Keith Schembri through their personal doctor Adrian Vella. When testifying, Cardona said that he suspected that someone in the public administration tried to frame him.
“It is highly symptomatic that in an attempt to deflect the investigation from the police, the anonymous writer, according to the suspicion of Dr. Cardona someone in public administration, did not try to implicate as the mastermind behind the assassination someone outside the government such as someone involved in arms trafficking or in the illegal oil or drug trafficking business. humans.” Nicole Meilak

16:41 “The behavior of the former Prime Minister, however, at best, could have indicated that he was in a state of complete self-denial about what happened in his Cabinet while in the worst case, it could also be considered a weak attempt at depistaggio in extremis of the investigation.” Nicole Meilak

16:40 An interesting look into the operations of Castille: “From his [Joseph Muscat’s] testimony but also in truth from the testimony of most of the witnesses who were or still are or are doing work in Castille, it was given the impression that everyone at the heart of the administration was working alone. No one knew what the person next to them was doing, who they were talking to or meeting, or who was responsible for what.” Nicole Meilak

16:36 The Board makes an interesting observation on Joseph Muscat. When he testified in the public inquiry, he said that the person who committed the crime, “apart from being a criminal and an assassin, is also dumb”, being the crime took place when Caruana Galizia was “almost politically irrelevant”.
“Muscat considers the assassination solely from a purely political point of view. He considers that the perpetrator was ignorant because he did not appreciate that, politically, he did not have to do so because the victim had become irrelevant. He tries to reduce the assassination to a deplorable and reprehensible political episode, and committed by the insane to silence a political opponent. Attempts are being made to make this assassination look like other political crimes that have taken place in Malta even in relatively recent times. It is obvious from a mass of evidence before this Board and elsewhere, that this was not the case.” Nicole Meilak

16:31 The Board divides Caruana Galizia journalistic work: pre-2013 election and post-2013. Her pre-2013 work saw her criticise the Labour Party in Opposition, and the governing Nationalist Party where she saw fit. “It can then be said that she had essentially a pro-Nationalist political agenda with criticism of the Labor Party.” Thus, the Labour Party saw her not only as a journalist from an opposing cap, but as a political adversary.
After 2013, Caruana Galizia’s writing provoked the public administration and political party - the Labour government and the Labour Party. Her writing was seen to have been hindering the government’s work, while the party saw her as a real threat that could contribute to a loss of power. Nicole Meilak

16:20 Chapter 6 now deals with the exercising of power and the assassination. The salient points will follow shortly. Nicole Meilak

16:18 “Interestingly, Alfred Camilleri [permanent secretary in the finance ministry] testified that the Ministry has begun to assiduously enforce that it be informed when there is a strong financial commitment in large projects following what happened in the extension of the kitchen and massive development in the San Vincenz nursing home by James Caterers and DB Group. Expenditure which, according to the Auditor General, had been authorized by direct order in breach of all the regulations governing public procurement.” Nicole Meilak

16:16 The Board makes reference to a variety of instances whereby members of government confirmed that certain projects were being coordinated by a small group of people, largely without informing the actual ministers concerned. First is Minister Michael Farrugia. He had been responsible for the lands department as parliamentary secretary, but was not informed whatsoever about the Cafe Premiere concession. With regards to the American University of Malta project, the Board notes that the Education Minister was not involved in the negotiations whatsoever. On the Vitals hospitals deal, Chris Fearne explained that he was not involved in the privatisation process, despite being parliamentary secretary for health at the time.
“The same modus operandi seems to have been adopted by the government to carry out major infrastructure projects including energy privatization. This is in stark contrast to the fact that the negotiation of the Electrogas contract fell directly on the remit of the Minister of Energy, the Honorable Konrad Mizzi. What was really surprising for the Board was the fact that an operation that would have a crucial impact on the country's economy and finances, the Minister responsible for this, the Honorable Professor Edward Scicluna, was in no way involved in its negotiation.” Nicole Meilak

16:09 The Board expressed deep concern over Joseph Muscat’s statement on the inevitability of intimacy between government and bis business. It said that this intimacy can provide fertile ground for corruption to flourish. It referred to an instance during the hearings where Minister Evarist Bartolo confirmed that a second government existed, and that this “shadow government” was being led by Keith Schembri. Former minister Edward Scicluna confirmed this when he spoke about an inner-core “kitchen cabinet”, and that he felt excluded from this core of people that were particularly close to the Prime Minister.
The board also notes that Keith Schembri had free reign to act as he pleases because he was known to be capable, to be a doer and to produce results. Nicole Meilak

15:47 The next chapter is titled "A style of leadership that favours impunity". We will highlight the salient points shortly. Nicole Meilak

15:45 The Board says that this created "a government within the government", with true power exercised by those who wanted to enrich themselves at the expense of the common good. Nicole Meilak

15:43 The Board states that those who planned and carried out the murder chose to do so by using a car bomb because they knew that similar crimes carried out in the 10 years prior, some of which were carried out by the same persons, remained unsolved. It also notes instances of close friendships between not only criminal elements and police officials, but also between businessmen involved in large public projects and high officials in regulatory entities. "These incestuous relations at many levels between the public administration at the highest levels of power, and big business, and organised crime, have created a corrupt system that has engulfed many institutions of the country from within." Nicole Meilak

15:37 "These testimonies indicate that, to them, Keith Schembri, the Chief of Staff in the Office of the Prime Minister; Police Commissioner Lawrence Cutajar and other senior officers of the body; former Minister Chris Cardona; as persons which could assure them such impunity. These people deny any involvement in the circumstances that led to the murder and beyond. This is an issue that this Board needs to leave in the hands of the investigating Police to further investigate. However, the fact that the people currently accused of involvement in the murder were convinced that they enjoyed such protection, from people in power who had the strength to grant it, remains very relevant to this Inquiry." Nicole Meilak

15:34 “In fact there is convincing evidence, especially from the evidence given before this Board but also in criminal proceedings, that the alleged material executors of the crime were at every stage well aware of the protection they were certain to enjoy from persons in the highest state positions, which could guarantee them such protection including in the police and in the political field. They expected that, as on other occasions, they would not be caught and if caught, they would be relieved to be released. The same is true, if anything, of the testimony of Vince Muscat known as il-Koħħu - accused as a material executor with others of the crime of admitting his guilt, as well as that of the intermediary Melvin Theuma. […] They were all convinced that they would enjoy this impunity and that they would somehow be released from arrest for their actions.” Nicole Meilak

15:30 “All of them have held positions of authority, decision-making powers against which specific allegations of misconduct, familiarity or closeness to persons involved in the assassination have been made and continue to be made, in particular any alleged principal. “In addition, similar allegations have been made against politicians including former Prime Minister Dr Joseph Muscat, Minister Edward Zammit Lewis, former Leader of the Opposition Dr Adrian Delia and former Secretary General Pierre Portelli. of the Nationalist Party . They have all held senior positions in public administration in the broadest sense or in the governance of the country but as results from the evidence, are in no way implicated in the assassination.” Nicole Meilak

15:28 “Organized crime seeks to act safely because it is covered by a veil of impunity, the result of friendships, family or communion of interest with persons in authority who can assure protection from investigation and prosecution for its criminal conduct. Characters such as Professor Joe Bannister, former MFSA Chairman; Mr Johann Buttigieg, former Chairman of the Planning Authority; Mr Heathcliff Farrugia and Mr Joseph Cuschieri, former Chairman of the Malta Gaming Authority; Mr Lawrence Cutajar former Commissioner of Police; Mr Silvio Valletta, former Assistant Commissioner and other senior officers in the Corps may fall into this category.” Nicole Meilak

15:25 “There is another level of organized crime that involves non-professionals, who are engaged in wholly lawful activities, business, public administration and politics but who decide to act together to obtain illicit gain. or illegal. This can qualify if proven, the allegations made about the Panama Papers, 17 Black and those about serious irregularities in the execution of major infrastructure projects such as Electrogas, the privatization of hospitals, Montenegro windfarms and others.” Nicole Meilak

15:24 The report now speaks briefly on organised crime. "Organized crime presupposes that those involved in the organization have the same goal of committing criminal behavior and that by their actions they appear to have begun to commit it. It often involves a nucleus of people who project and execute the criminal project with which they involve other people to in one way or another help them in carrying out their activity."
"These people may not be aware of the criminal activity of the organization but must take responsibility for their actions. This, if anything, is because they are facilitating the commission of crimes and favoring the creation of a web of evil that infiltrates society and allows criminals to act with impunity." Nicole Meilak

15:21 To avoid too much repetition, we will be skimming briefly through the next parts of the report that deal with more conceptual, academic discussions on the issues. Nicole Meilak

15:20 "In fact, one administration after another considers measures to sanction illegalities and irregularities as a useful weapon to restore order and good governance while not overemphasizing those who have broken the law. It is used, and not exceptionally, as a means of satisfying the desire of those who have broken the law to continue to enjoy what they have acquired illegally. This is by paying a monetary penalty as is done for example in building sanction schemes not in accordance with planning and development regulations, as is also and often used, by various administrations over the last decades, as a fiscal measure to it regulates abuses in the financial field and the payment of taxes even with a view to the State deriving significant revenue from the public treasury." Nicole Meilak

15:15 On the culture of impunity, the report says that this culture is fostered when the State fails to protect the rule of law. The Board states that this culture of impunity has been embedded in the social psyche for a long time, with little to nothing having been done to eradicate it. Nicole Meilak

15:08 “It is a fact that there are two certain lines of police investigation - there may be others. One that led to the arrest of accused persons as principals, accomplices or perpetrators of the crime and the other that is still at a later stage and that has not led to any conclusions justifying the arrest of indicted persons. They also involve persons who have held persons in important positions in state and public administration entities. Involvement, which if proven, does not necessarily lead to these persons being charged with participating in the execution of the murder as actually occurred. It turns out in fact that the police are investigating allegations that the murder of the journalist was being planned long before it actually took place, by other people even though with the involvement of the same material executors today accused of committing a crime.” Nicole Meilak

15:02 We're now at Chapter 4, dealing with impunity and power. The report reads that high-level police officials, when testifying in the inquiry, said that they do not exclude the possibility of further investigations that could lead to the involvement of other people who had an interest in eliminating the journalist. "This is not necessarily connected with those accused today of having comitted or participated in the execution of the crime."
It is worth remembering that Vince Muscat 'il-Koħħu' alleged in court that there was a parallel plan to have Caruana Galizia murdered, with the involvement of former minister Chris Cardona. Nicole Meilak

14:57 The report identifies three response levels targeted at Caruana Galizia's journalistic work. These are the reactions to her gossip-style stories, her work on government maladministration, and her stories that reveal corruption among high levels of authority and power.
To the first style, the Board identified that these reactions take the form of online contributions on websites and other media. On her maladministration work, the reactions would generally appear as measures that “may be considered by some to be politically acceptable but certainly not legitimate if they are seen as an attempt to stifle freedom of expression” - often justified by the argument that they would use the same weapons against her as she used against them.
On the third style, involving revelations on organised crime, “the reaction to this type of investigation can only be measured by the undisputed fact that the persons involved were well aware that what the journalist was revealing to them was in substance correct.”
”They may also have been aware that she was going to reveal other, perhaps ore incriminating stories.” Nicole Meilak

14:43 Considering the nature of the stories that were being published by Caruana Galizia, that she was dealing with high-level corruption as well as individuals involved in organised crime groups, the Board asserts that the State should have realised that these allegations weren't frivolous. "They should have reasonably concluded that the journalist was exposing herself to huge risks and imminent danger on her life, property, and family. The fact that she was in possession of such sensitive data should have been enough for the State to coordinate the highest level of protection to protect her life. Nicole Meilak

14:35 The Board insists that private relations and lifestyles must be protected and respected, even by journalists, unless these are being used and manipulated for political or personal gain and at the expense of the common good. Nicole Meilak

14:34 However, the Board notes that some of these personal relationships may not have been unrelated to allegations of public administration. "There are serious indications of evidence that there are occasions when such situations have been manipulated by those interested in gaining favours, access to information, financial gain or otherwise. Today, the fact that many of the stories published by Caruana Galizia indicating such relationships are being corroborated, one needs to appreciate that their publication was more than justified." (p.78) Nicole Meilak

14:28 “In this context the Board found that Caruana Galizia often embellished her writings with references to aspects of the social lives of politically exposed persons or even persons who were acquainted with public administration or the ruling party. References that often referred to personal life and private relationships, written in a style that could offend and hurt. This was an aspect of Caruana Galizia's writing that was controversial and objectionable to many because it was more akin to gossip than to serious journalistic investigation. There may have been those who rightly felt even seriously offended by such writing. But it is not clear from the evidence that the murder may have been motivated by an extreme reaction from someone to such writing.” (p.77) Nicole Meilak

14:26 "It is not the competence of this Board to pass definitive judgement on the veracity of these assertions and other similar ones made by Caruana Galizia. Certainly, both Dr Muscat and Mr Schembri had every right to be irritated and angered if these allegations were not true." (p.76) Nicole Meilak

14:24 Here, the report refers to the Egrant scandal, whereby Caruana Galizia confidently alleged that Michelle Muscat, wife to Joseph Muscat, was the ultimate beneficial owner of the elusive Panama company. "Same goes for the serious allegation that the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff [Keith Schembri] was suffering from a terminal illness without showing proof, even though it resulted that he did travel for treatment with expenses paid by the person who is now accused of being involved in the assassination." Nicole Meilak

14:22 "This doesn't mean that there weren't cases where her contributions were found to be completely incorrect or were not adequately proven. But these were exceptions and even these cases had elements that deserved to be investigated," the report reads. Nicole Meilak

14:21 In the report, the Board describes Caruana Galizia as a victim of her own skill and success. "[Caruana Galizia] was victim of her skills as an investigative journalist and of the success that she garnered by publishing information received from authoritative sources." Nicole Meilak

14:19 Conclusions: The board censured the Cabinet’s decision to gives its parliamentary support to the members implicated in the Panama scandal, saying the individual ministers’ decision to let things move on as if nothing happened was a strong political signal and silent blessing of the impunity being created at the heart of an administration. Matthew Vella

14:17 Conclusions: The board said the Cabinet’s inaction could not be explained, given that the apparent stewardship of the country’s towards economic growth was being left in the hands of a few people while those carrying out their duty, were placed at risk: no priority was given to ensure good governance or rule of law; and this responsibility of the Cabinet is all the more incumbent given the disapproval of those who, like minister Evarist Bartolo, publicly criticised the “law for Gods and law for animals” in the weeks following the publication of the Panama Papers. “It was a shocking assertion by a Cabinet member in a country where the rule of law had collapsed.” Matthew Vella

14:17 “The Board cannot rule out the possibility that there may have been other persons who in some way participated in the commission of the crime, extraneous to those currently indicted and with different motives. This was not ruled out by the senior police officers in charge of investigating the crime who testified before this Board, although they all confirmed that the evidence they had against the persons accused justified them being brought before the Courts.” (p.72) Nicole Meilak

14:14 The Board still maintains that the lack of political partisanship in the murder doesn’t take away from the fact that the information that was revealed by Caruana Galizia, specifically on the key people entrusted with running the country, were crucial elements that were relevant to the Board’s terms of reference. Nicole Meilak

14:13 Conclusions: On Cabinet responsibility: The board of inquiry concluded that the Muscat Cabinet was also collectively responsible by not taking the necessary action necessary on the allegations of Caruana Galizia published on the administration, particularly on the allegations related to 17 Black. “Surely at this stage, no Cabinet member could be exonerated from the obligation to assert their voluntary judgement at that stage, that there was no place in the Cabinet for those responsible.” Matthew Vella

14:11 "It turns out that the machinery of the ruling party was forced to take initiatives to balance the effect that its writing was having on the electorate on the Electoral Board. But there is absolutely no indication that her assassination may have been connected in any way with partisan political considerations. The Board has no reason to doubt that the expressions of grief and disgust for the assassination by government and party government officials in this regard were genuine." (p.70-71) Nicole Meilak

14:08 On Daphne, the report reads as follows: “In some respects she was aware of her strength and of the fact that through her direct and no-holds-barred style of writing in which she set out the facts of her investigation, […] she was able to influence what is taking place in the country. Many were the ones who loved and admired her because of her writing. Many others, however, therefore hated and despised her. This is evidenced by the thousands of people who followed her ‘Running Commentary’ and who actively participated in dialogue with her, for better or for worse.” (p.69) Nicole Meilak

14:01 The report now makes reference to some case law before continuing on the topic of journalism, and how an attack on journalism is an attack on freedom of expression.
"When that attack leads to the assassination of a journalist, that democracy suffers an injury that is not easy to recover from. And when that assassination involves a journalist that dedicated her life to researching the truth by investigating the behaviour of the public administration, and does so to keep those in power accountable for their behaviour, democracy receives a death blow." Nicole Meilak

13:55 "Awareness is growing on the vital role of free and independent journalism in a democratic state, founded on the rule of law and the need for journalists, especially those that dedicate their activities to investigating the behaviour of state entities trusted with the public administration, to be adequately protected. This should be done not only by having structures that guarantee adequate protection to those persons but also with the State creating a favourable environment that allows those persons to exercise their functions in a secure and effective way.” (p.63-64) Nicole Meilak

13:50 We now move on to Chapter 3 of the report, dealing with investigative journalism in a participatory democracy. Nicole Meilak

13:48 "Once facts indicated that persons in or close to the public administration may have been involved in some way, it was obvious that the Board had to take into account these aspects that could have contributed to the assassination." Nicole Meilak

13:45 The Board is confirming that there was mutual cooperation throughout the entirety of the investigation between police and other authorities who are investigating aspects of the murder. Nicole Meilak

13:44 "The common good demands that society be well and promptly informed of the involvement of state entities and the people who compose them in the tragic event that shook the country and provoked a reaction of disgust beyond our borders and whether it it somehow emerges." (p.57) Nicole Meilak

13:41 However, the Board dubs it "completely wrong" to think that having a public inquiry run parallel to criminal proceedings possibly prejudice those same proceedings. "This is because people accused of crimes that emerge from the facts under investigation [in this inquiry], can plead in other criminal proceedings that their right to a fair hearing is being prejudiced." (p. 56) Nicole Meilak

13:36 “The Board is satisfied that the greatest added value of this Public Inquiry is the very fact that the Government of the day decided to submit all State operations and entities under the scrutiny and judgment of an independent board to determine if there might have been some form of involvement in their assassination. Gathering evidence in a public forum is in itself a powerful exercise in transparency and accountability designed to provide a measure of satisfaction and healing to the victim’s family and society at large.” (p.56) Nicole Meilak

13:33 We're now at Chapter 2 of the report. This section relates to the proof collected deemed relevant to the Inquiry. Nicole Meilak

13:31 The report makes a brief statement on degree of proof. "The Board, after deliberate and responsible deliberation in light of professional integrity, comes to the conclusion that it was not only possible but also likely that the the facts occurred as was shown by the evidence obtained." (p.52) Nicole Meilak

13:26 "It is true that none of the signatories to the agreement by which those terms of reference were drafted can unilaterally and arbitrarily amend it nor interpret it extensively or restrictively. The terms are what they are, and only this Board has the faculty to interpret them faithfully within the meaning of the words and thoughts expressed therein." (p.50) Nicole Meilak

13:24 The Board is also hitting out at statements made by Robert Abela and Joseph Muscat that only they, as Prime Ministers, have the right to interpret the Terms of Reference given to the Board. “This is completely incorrect. These terms of reference have been agreed on between the Government and family of the murdered journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.” Nicole Meilak

13:22 Similarly to what was said earlier, the report reiterates that it is unacceptable for certain factions, including the defence lawyers of the Caruana Galizia family, to have the Terms of Reference extended so that any activity by State bodies, any major projects promoted by them on which there have been allegations of maladministration, be subject to investigation by the board. Nicole Meilak

13:20 "It was also for this reason that this Board was asked to investigate whether a de facto state of impunity could be developed which favored the commission of the crime. In order to carry out this specific task this Board needed to broaden its investigation to establish the relevant facts that could lead it, as it did, to determine these crucial elements for the Inquiry." (p.48) Nicole Meilak

13:18 The next section of the report deals with the quality of evidence produced, especially in light of certain reservations held by some over the inquiry. “Primary government players, including the Honourable Prime Minister, expressed the understanding that this Board was going beyond that which was absolutely needed in the gathering of evidence to fulfil its task […] This interpretation could have been valid if it wasn’t for the existing factual elements that raise reasonable suspicion of involvement of the public administration in the events that took place before and after the homicide that could have contributed to it taking place.” Nicole Meilak

13:12 Conclusions: The panel then proceeded with another set of conclusions.
1. Important officials controlling certain entities were in dereliction of duty before and after the homicide;
2. Chief among these was the Commissioner of Police and the corps to investigate the journalist’s allegations after the Panama Papers, Pilatus Bank and 17 Black; equally censurable is the inaction of the financial regulator MFSA and the FIAU;
3. The State showed itself hostile to investigative journalism, with the Office of the Prime Minister and its officials orchestrating illicit actions to vilify Caruana Galizia, and creating a hostile environment;
4. Caruana Galizia was considered to be the enemy of a small group of people at the intersection of political and economic power, threatening their plans;
5. The State did not take preventive measures to protect Caruana Galizia from the risk of violent actions;
6. The State’s responsibility is aggravated by its role in the creation of a climate of impunity as well as to a dehumanisation of the journalist, whose allegations of illegality are now set to be verified, and which suggest that elements inside the State could have, directly and indirectly, contributed to execution of the murder, or else enabled it;
7. After the homicide, public authorities and high-level police officers acted illegally to aid and abet suspected persons in the police investigation, by derailing journalists’ investigations to look towards other ‘suspects’;
8. The State cannot as yet be held directly responsible for the execution of the assassination, despite the allegations levelled at former Labour minister Chris Cardona of having had close relations to the murder suspects and even being allegedly involved, allegations he has denied;
9. The board is satisfied that the State was aware that Caruana Galizia was exposed to the real risk of a criminal act, given that it itself enabled this very environment of risk; and that the State, Police, OPM and Security Services did not minimise this risk but indeed, escalated it.
Matthew Vella

13:10 “It is therefore completely incorrect and unacceptable that some insisted, including the Honorable Joseph Muscat in his testimony before this Board, that once this Board considered it necessary to investigate in more detail the behavior of entities in the Executive, the Board must also extend this same detail to the other organs of the State.” (p.44-45) Nicole Meilak

13:08 The report now focuses on the behaviour of the executive branches of government. “Although it is acknowledged that every state body has shortcomings and defects that contribute to undermining good governance in the country - including lack of transparency and accountability, inefficiency in inadequate systems and structures - there is nothing to indicate, neither from the evidence produced before this Board nor from facts in the public domain, that the legislative and judicial organs could have materially contributed to the murder.” Nicole Meilak

13:05 “When throughout the hearings and during this Inquiry, as well as from the fact that it was in the public domain, it resulted that some events involved or could have involved some members of the Cabinet or its officials, it did not make sense to invoke this custom of secrecy," the report reads, with reference to Cabinet's secrecy privilege. Nicole Meilak

12:59 Matthew Caruana Galizia quoting the report: ‘the State has to shoulder responsibility for the assassination because it created an atmosphere of impunity’

“While there is no proof that the State per se played a played a role in the assassination of [Daphne], for reasons amply shown in the body of this report, the State has to shoulder responsibility for the assassination because it created an atmosphere of impunity [cont.] https://t.co/U9IzGLFHTX

— Matthew Caruana Galizia (@mcaruanagalizia) July 29, 2021

Nicole Meilak

12:58 The Board says that it doesn’t agree with this rationale, and so advised witnesses to testify on all those facts that were deemed pertinent to the questions being asked. “The Board declares that it doesn’t understand how members of Cabinet can invoke this privilege of secrecy when it was the House of Representatives that approved the setting up of this Board through a resolution on 12 December 2018, and asked the Board to investigate independently and report to the Prime Minister on events concerning the assassin.” Nicole Meilak

12:55 Opposition leader: ‘Robert Abela must ensure that responsibility for this culture of impunity is shouldered’

The State inquiry is clear: Daphne Caruana Galizia’s murder was enabled by the collective inaction of Joseph Muscat’s Cabinet, many of whom still hold public office. Robert Abela must ensure that responsibility for this culture of impunity is shouldered.#DaphneCaruanaGalizia

— Bernard Grech (@bernardgrechmt) July 29, 2021

Nicole Meilak

12:52 “It is not then an absolute rule. It is a rule that must be applied and upheld insofar as it is necessary precisely to implement, ensure and strengthen the collective responsibility of Ministers. It is a rule that allows exceptions. This is being said because before this Board, both the Honorable Joseph Muscat and some of the Ministers, having been asked to give information on what happened in the Cabinet on facts relevant to the assassination as they emerge in the terms of reference of the Inquiry, felt bound themselves to the rule of secrecy and submitted that they were not then in a position to answer the questions put.” (p.42) Nicole Meilak

12:52 The report has now entered a discussion on Cabinet and the privileges of confidentiality it enjoys. “The rule of confidentiality is a custom designed to ensure that what is said in the Cabinet remains hidden. This is so that ministers are free to express their views even if they do not agree with policies or projects proposals while they are still being discussed. This is because once a decision by the Cabinet is taken and adopted, it will be binding on all members of the Cabinet who will be obliged to support it precisely because they had to assume the collegial responsibility for it.” Nicole Meilak

12:46 Conclusions: The panel said it was left impressed by the disinhibited friendliness of Keith Schembri with those allegedly involved in the murder, which assured them that the powers that be would have their back. “The fact that this mentality existed inside organised crime as to the chief of staff, and that the prime minister was referred to by them as ‘the number 1, ‘ix-xih’, and ‘il-king’, shows the level of confidence they boasted thanks to the culture of impunity that reigned and in which they felt protected.” Matthew Vella

12:40 “The lack of censorship since the disclosure of the circumstances in which the 17 Black account was opened, which included specific allegations of illegal if not criminal conduct of politically exposed persons, presents a scenario that is entirely different. In that case, the Board needs to investigate whether failure to take timely action against these allegedly involved persons, would in itself constitute an unlawful act even if it does not result in a breach of any law and therefore illegality, although this is not excluded." Nicole Meilak

12:38 Conclusions: It said the OPM had “centrally organised” the isolation of the journalist at the time that she had momentarily turned her guns on newly-elected Opposition leader Adrian Delia, specifically through “the wilful inaction of the institutions, to facilitate a climate of high risk that allowed those who wanted to achieve their aims. Those who executed her felt they had the assurance of being protected by those who were interested in silencing the journalist.” Matthew Vella

12:37 On the other hand, the Board notes that the lack of timely action by those in power - in these cases, that of Prime Minister Joseph Muscat assuming that he acted in good faith - could have been seen as poor political judgement. Nicole Meilak

12:35 "While the illicit act of a public administrator necessarily presupposes a wrong political judgment, whether intentional or not, not every wrong political judgment is necessarily unlawful. The crucial case for this Inquiry - the opening of accounts by politically exposed persons (PEPs), in foreign jurisdictions such as Panama or the Virgin Islands and the circumstances regarding the opening of the account 17 Black - classically illustrate this distinction." Nicole Meilak

12:33 We're past page 30 of the report now. Here, the Board is discussing various legal definitions, including a distinction between illegal and illicit acts. "In this context one then concludes that while illegality inevitably generates maladministration, maladministration does not necessarily imply illegality. It is therefore not sufficient to determine whether the public authority acted unlawfully. It was also necessary to assess whether it had acted in accordance with the principles, values ​​and virtues which comprise the rule of law and which are all constitutive elements of good governance and freedom." Nicole Meilak

12:28 Conclusions: The judges accused the former Commissioner of Police, the Security Services and other regulatory authorities of dereliction of duty in the face of the allegations published by Caruana Galizia. “The lethargy of these institutions in investigating serious allegations of criminal breaches or of public administration breaches, is inexplicable and censurable. It could not have been just incompetence or indifference. The web of control on the public administration was created to counter these serious allegations. There was an orchestrated plan to neutralise the assassinated journalist’s investigative work.” Matthew Vella

12:28 However, the Board also says that there is nothing that precludes it from looking at existing criminal evidence in order to help carry out the tasks assigned to it, namely that of determining the shortcomings and responsibilities of State entities and persons with regards to the Terms of Refence. Nicole Meilak

12:25 “The Board constantly maintained this caveat constantly, that of the presumption of innocence of any person who may have been subject to criminal proceedings connected with this or other crime.” Nicole Meilak

12:24 Conclusions: While the panel said it had “no proof of the involvement of the public administration in the execution of the assassination”, the judges said the denigratory campaign that demonised Caruana Galizia, created a favourable climate for her elimination within the context of the alleged culture of impunity that had flourished. “It was her writing on the links between business and politics that led to her assassination. This is what the evidence this board has, leads to. None of the witnesses contested this reality.” Matthew Vella

12:22

I have just published the full report of the Public Inquiry Daphne Caruana Galizia. The report merits mature analysis beyond partisan arguments. Lessons must be drawn and the reforms must continue with greater resolve. - RA

— Robert Abela (@RobertAbela_MT) July 29, 2021

Nicole Meilak

12:21 Moving on, the Board insists that its function concerned the State and persons comprising it. “The Board has no direct function to determine whether certain behaviour by individual persons could qualify to be criminal behaviour and could lead to criminal proceedings against them.” Nicole Meilak

12:18 Conclusions: The panel said the journalist was attacked personally, with incidents of verbal abuse, and legal actions to bring about financial burden on her. Matthew Vella

12:17 The report now proceeds to discuss the human rights elements of the public inquiry, with specific referent to Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The Board says that the family of Daphne Caruana Galizia, who were given the right to participate fully in these proceedings, were involved in every stage of the hearings, and were present even for testimonies heard behind closed doors. Nicole Meilak

12:15 "On the other hand, it is equally unacceptable the insistence from certain quarters, including to some extent the defence representing the Caruana Galizia family, that the terms of reference of this Inquiry should have extended to the investigation of 'any activity by State bodies, any major project promoted by them on which there have been allegations of maladministration and abuse of power or on which allegations of serious irregularities and corruption have been made. • This was certainly not the purpose for which this Board of Inquiry was set up." Nicole Meilak

12:14 “The main supporters of the Government, including the Prime Minister, expressed the view that this Board was going beyond the gathering of evidence from what was absolutely necessary to fulfill its task. They appear to be of the opinion that this Board should limit its investigation strictly to the immediate circumstances which led to its assassination […] This interpretation could have been valid had it not been for the factual elements which gave rise to a reasonable suspicion that there may have been involvement of elements in the public administration which occurred both before and after the murder which may have contributed to its perpetration. Nicole Meilak

12:12 A point made by the Board is that it had every right to interpret its own Terms of Reference. It noted how in December last year, the Board chose not to close the inquiry at the given deadline but instead continue with proceedings. “It was therefore, in order to be able to conclude to its satisfaction the assignment given to it, the Board interpreted the Terms of Reference in the sense that, if necessary, it would extend the conclusion, as it did.” Nicole Meilak

12:09 The Board states clearly that its function is not to identify whether criminal or other steps should be taken against persons who turn out to have been in any way convicted of a criminal offense or serious administrative abuse. “It is for this reason that the Board will notify the Commissioner of Police with a copy of the acts of this inquiry which will include all the evidence heard to be at his disposal for any action it deems appropriate in the investigations is conducting.” Nicole Meilak

12:08 Conclusions: The panel said that when Caruana Galizia started her frontal attack on the powers that be, the reaction from the State was to neutralise the fall-out from her journalistic work “so that the plans for some people’s enrichment, through their connections to the public administration, would not be prejudiced” Matthew Vella

12:07 The report's introduction consists largely of an academic reflection into the purposes of this inquiry. This was the second time that a public inquiry was set up in Malta, the first being the 1996 inquiry into the bus ticketing system, led by Judge Victor Caruana Colombo. "Therefore, the Board has no local case law or local authors on which to rely on the procedures it should follow." Nicole Meilak

12:05 Executive summary: The three-judge inquiry attacked Labour’s ‘business-friendly’ approach as having been “money friendly” at the expense of the rule of law; it said it had enough evidence showing that the intimacy between big business interests over large national projects which in the main had fallen under the scrutiny of the National Audit Office, suggesting numerous episodes of vitiated procurement procedures. “The reality is that a section of big business, unsurprisingly, took the occasion to operate and realise its projects with the least of administrative barriers and through the manipulation of the highest public officials, creating ties of common interest. Crucial to this was the chief of staff to the Prime Minister [Keith Schembri], who roped in the public administration at its highest level, to the big businessman.” Matthew Vella

12:05 The board organised 93 sittings as part of the public inquiry, hearing 120 witnesses in total. The board says that the witnesses served to open a window into the "mindset" of the Muscat administration, and how this affected the events under the inquiry's scrutiny. Nicole Meilak

12:01 Hi: I will also be reporting snippets from the conclusions. Matthew Vella

11:59 Good afternoon. The full public inquiry report into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia has just been published. We will be reading and live blogging the report here for you to follow with us. Nicole Meilak

The panel said in its conclusions in the report that the Muscat administration had cultivated “an extended culture of impunity” among its highest officials as well as ‘persons of trust’ and a restricted circle of politicians, businessmen and criminals.

The three-judge inquiry attacked Labour’s ‘business-friendly’ approach as having been “money friendly” at the expense of the rule of law; it said it had enough evidence showing that the intimacy between big business interests over large national projects which in the main had fallen under the scrutiny of the National Audit Office, suggesting numerous episodes of vitiated procurement procedures. “The reality is that a section of big business, unsurprisingly, took the occasion to operate and realise its projects with the least of administrative barriers and through the manipulation of the highest public officials, creating ties of common interest. Crucial to this was the chief of staff to the Prime Minister [Keith Schembri], who roped in the public administration at its highest level, to the big businessman.”

The panel said that when Caruana Galizia started her frontal attack on the powers that be, the reaction from the State was to neutralise the fall-out from her journalistic work “so that the plans for some people’s enrichment, through their connections to the public administration, would not be prejudiced”.

The crux of Caruana Galizia’s work was at the intersection of the Panama Papers and the mysterious Dubai company 17 Black, the latter owned by Yorgen Fenech and believed to have been used as a vehicle to fund Keith Schembri’s and former energy minister Konrad Mizzi’s secretive Panama Papers. Fenech was a part-owner of the Delimara gas plant, the chief electoral plank for Labour’s election in 2013.

The panel said the journalist was attacked personally, with incidents of verbal abuse, and legal actions to bring about financial burden on her. “It is unacceptable for some State representative to promote such a tactic when the State is obliged to defend the value of journalism in a democracy and the fundamental right to free speech, as well as the life of a journalist.”

While the panel said it had “no proof of the involvement of the public administration in the execution of the assassination”, the judges said the denigratory campaign that demonised Caruana Galizia, created a favourable climate for her elimination within the context of the alleged culture of impunity that had flourished. “It was her writing on the links between business and politics that led to her assassination. This is what the evidence this board has, leads to. None of the witnesses contested this reality.”

The judges accused the former Commissioner of Police, the Security Services and other regulatory authorities of dereliction of duty in the face of the allegations published by Caruana Galizia. “The lethargy of these institutions in investigating serious allegations of criminal breaches or of public administration breaches, is inexplicable and censurable. It could not have been just incompetence or indifference. The web of control on the public administration was created to counter these serious allegations. There was an orchestrated plan to neutralise the assassinated journalist’s investigative work.”

Prime Minister’s responsibility

The board accused former prime minister Joseph Muscat of indirect responsibility in retaining Keith Schembri by his side as chief of staff when he was implicated in the Panama Papers, especially in the wake of the 17 Black allegations. This in itself, with the government MPs in the House expressing full trust in Schembri and Mizzi, further entrenched the culture of impunity on which organised crime could rest upon.

Cabinet responsibility

The board of inquiry concluded that the Muscat Cabinet was also collectively responsible by not taking the necessary action necessary on the allegations of Caruana Galizia published on the administration, particularly on the allegations related to 17 Black. “Surely at this stage, no Cabinet member could be exonerated from the obligation to assert their voluntary judgement at that stage, that there was no place in the Cabinet for those responsible.”

The board said the Cabinet’s inaction could not be explained, given that the apparent stewardship of the country’s towards economic growth was being left in the hands of a few people while those carrying out their duty, were placed at risk: no priority was given to ensure good governance or rule of law; and this responsibility of the Cabinet is all the more incumbent given the disapproval of those who, like minister Evarist Bartolo, publicly criticised the “law for Gods and law for animals” in the weeks following the publication of the Panama Papers. “It was a shocking assertion by a Cabinet member in a country where the rule of law had collapsed.”

The board censured the Cabinet’s decision to gives its parliamentary support to the members implicated in the Panama scandal, saying the individual ministers’ decision to let things move on as if nothing happened was a strong political signal and silent blessing of the impunity being created at the heart of an administration.

Reforms and recommendations

The panel then proceeded with another set of conclusions:

1. Important officials controlling certain entities were in dereliction of duty before and after the homicide;

2. Chief among these was the Commissioner of Police and the corps to investigate the journalist’s allegations after the Panama Papers, Pilatus Bank and 17 Black; equally censurable is the inaction of the financial regulator MFSA and the FIAU;

3. The State showed itself hostile to investigative journalism, with the Office of the Prime Minister and its officials orchestrating illicit actions to vilify Caruana Galizia, and creating a hostile environment;

4. Caruana Galizia was considered to be the enemy of a small group of people at the intersection of political and economic power, threatening their plans;

5. The State did not take preventive measures to protect Caruana Galizia from the risk of violent actions;

6. The State’s responsibility is aggravated by its role in the creation of a climate of impunity as well as to a dehumanisation of the journalist, whose allegations of illegality are now set to be verified, and which suggest that elements inside the State could have, directly and indirectly, contributed to execution of the murder, or else enabled it;

7. After the homicide, public authorities and high-level police officers acted illegally to aid and abet suspected persons in the police investigation, by derailing journalists’ investigations to look towards other ‘suspects’;

8. The State cannot as yet be held directly responsible for the execution of the assassination, despite the allegations levelled at former Labour minister Chris Cardona of having had close relations to the murder suspects and even being allegedly involved, allegations he has denied;

9. The board is satisfied that the State was aware that Caruana Galizia was exposed to the real risk of a criminal act, given that it itself enabled this very environment of risk; and that the State, Police, OPM and Security Services did not minimise this risk but indeed, escalated it.

Prime Minister Robert Abela announced today that he will today publish the public inquiry report into the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.

In a letter to Parliamentary Speaker Anġlu Farrugia, Abela said that he received the inquiry report earlier on Thursday, and intended on publishing it later that day. 

"While the terms of the inquiry ask only for me to table the report in Parliament, I believe that we must do more and hold a discussion on this as soon as possible," Abela wrote.

He requested that Parliament convene on Friday 30 July at 9am to discuss the report without a vote and without taking parliamentary questions, with equal discussion time between Government and Opposition.

Meanwhile, Abela wrote to Opposition leader Bernard Grech about the way forward with regards to the public inquiry. 

"In the past months, Parliament led important reforms that strengthened our country's institutions, the processes that offer justice, and our democratic framework. I assure you that the same processes will continue in the times to come."

Abela was responding to a previous correspondence from the Opposition leader. In this letter, Grech insisted that a bipartisan effort from the House of Representatives is needed so as to enact the changes recommended by the public inquiry into the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia.

READ ALSO | Daphne public inquiry: Grech calls on parliament to ‘close dark chapter’

Meanwhile, rule of law NGO Repubblika have requested to be present in parliament during discussions on the public inquiry.

"We are aware of how much the government has worked against the inquiry and how Prime Minister Robert Abela ridiculed the family when they insisted on having this inquiry," it said in a statement.

The NGO further commented on Thursday's parliamentary committee meeting which saw the Speaker and government MPs fail to commit themselves to having several witnesses testify against Rosianne Cutajar. 

Cutajar was found guilty of breaching ethics by failing to declare income from a property deal involving murder suspect Yorgen Fenech.