JPO pays tribute to Caruana Galizia, earns rebuke of old foe Jason Micallef

One of the main critics of Daphne Caruana Galizia during her controversial journalistic career has saluted the assassinated journalist for having exposed “a web of corruption which has put our country to shame”.

The former Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando, now the chairman of the Malta Council for Science and Technology and a supporter of the Muscat administration, had clashed head-on with the journalist over her campaign to denigrate him and for invading his privacy.

But in a Facebook post, Pullicino Orlando saluted the memory of Caruana Galizia, yet not without some nuance about the reckless nature of the blogger’s writing.

“Open note to Daphne Caruana Galizia,” Pullicino Orlando wrote, addressing the slain journalist herself.

“You lied so often, about so many people, that a lot of us ended up not believing you when you said the truth. Just like the boy who cried wolf. I decry you for the lies and for the waste of your considerable talent as a writer on malicious gossip.

“I also, however, salute you for your courage and tenacity in exposing those among us who were using their connections or position to weave a web of corruption which has put our country to shame. May they get what they deserve. May you rest in peace.”

But umbrage came one of Pullicino Orlando’s old foes: the former Labour secretary-general who in 2008 had made the Mistragate scandal the centre of Labour’s electoral campaign, Jason Micallef.

“I cannot not comment on what this false man said today when he had been the author of the biggest scandal and lie of the 2008 electoral campaign, the Mistra case,” Micallef, today the CEO of the Valletta Cultural Agency, said.

“Only one day after the March 2008 election, the PN and its allies, including the blogger,” he said in a reference to Caruana Galizia, “came out against JPO because they had by they had reached their aim.”

Pullicino Orlando had indeed been elected from two districts, after being turned into an attack dog to hound Alfred Sant and challenge him about his allegations that he had influence the issuance of a planning permit for the open-air disco on the land he had leased.

“[The PN] stole that election by just over 1,000 votes. But the irony continues. The man who is today being interrogated, had welcomed this false man who today is pontificating… I’m proud of having never given my support to this false man who was rehabilitated by Labour after being expelled from the PN.”

Historically, the relationship between Pullicino Orlando and Caruana Galizia harkens backs to the malaise of Maltese society.

When Pullicino Orlando was revealed by Labour in 2008 of having leased his agricultural land in Mistra for an open-air disco, which had been covered by an irregular permit, Caruana Galizia was vehement in her defence of the embattled MP.

In a defamation case in 2015, Pullicino Orlando told the court that at the time of the scandal he did not know Caruana Galizia, but that he had been sent to Caruana Galizia’s house, by her friend and Richard Cachia Caruana - then permanent representative to the EU - to ghost-write a newspaper opinion piece in his defence. He claimed Cachia Caruana “insisted that I leave the matter in her hands. He told me that Caruana Galizia wrote all campaign related articles for the PN.”

In another case, a Court of Appeal had ruled that various blogpost penned by Caruana Galizia on Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando constituted an intrusion in his private life. The posts, which consisted mainly of photos, were published on the late journalist’s blog between 2010 and 2016.

Judge Anthony Ellul said the posts were “gossip” and unrelated to Pullicino Orlando’s public role. He ruled that the court had “no doubt that [these particular posts about Pullicino Orlando] are nothing more than gossip that interests those with nothing better to do and who have a thirst for news about people’s private lives”.

The court had stressed on the need for a balance between freedom of expression and one’s right to privacy. “A balance must be found between the two fundamental rights. Obviously, where there is, for example, a debate of public interest, there can be little scope for the restriction of one’s right to disseminate information because the public has a right to know,” observed the court.

It further said that it had “no doubt that [these particular posts about Pullicino Orlando] are nothing more than gossip that interests those with nothing better to do and who have a thirst for news about people’s private lives”.