The rogue trader given a Presidential Pardon to tell all on the Enemalta oil procurement scandal could not be made to return the proceeds of the alleged corruption without the Cabinet’s involve-ment, according to the Office of the Prime Minister.
The statement comes in reaction to criticism levelled at the Cabinet and Prime Minister for choosing to oversee the pardon process despite the legal option of having the Attorney General handle the matter on his own, without political interference.
Labour MP Evarist Bartolo and spokesman Emanuel Mallia have argued that the AG was legally empowered to guarantee immunity from prosecution to oil trader George Farrugia.
Seeing as the politicians in this case have a potential conflict of interest, with the possibility of Minister Austin Gatt having a direct or indirect responsibility for the affair, they should have stayed out of it, Labour argues.
However, the OPM said the Government would have been restricted in the conditions imposed on Mr Farrugia had it opted to use the law that empowers the AG.
“The pardon given to Mr Farrugia contains various conditions which go beyond what is contemplated in Article 19 of the Permanent Commission Against Corruption Act, specifically in matters related to refunds of proceeds of crime.”
On top of the standard condition to tell all the truth, Mr Farrugia is bound to return all illicit proceeds and issue payment on account of €250,000 within five days of the pardon. He must also make his evidence available to any other investigation or inquiry in the future.
Mr Bartolo also questioned whether the version of the pardon approved by Cabinet on Friday was the same as that issued by the President on Sunday evening.
A spokesman for the OPM said two clarifications had been included in the final text issued by the President, which was “fully in line with the Cabinet’s recommendation”.
The changes, included on the President’s request, clarified it was Mr Farrugia who had informed the Police Commissioner he was willing to give evidence in exchange for a Pardon, and that he should give “all the information that he is aware of in relation to the facts”. This was added to a paragraph that said Mr Farrugia should say the truth and nothing but the truth.
Another addition was approved by the Prime Minister on the AG’s advice: that Mr Farrugia declare in writing that he agrees to and would follow the conditions stated.
The spokesman also rejected an insinuation in a question put by Mr Bartolo, who on Tuesday asked if the Prime Minister had met anyone who, with documents in hand, had alleged there was rampant corruption at Enemalta. “The Prime Minister denies Evarist Bartolo’s allegation.”
He also rejected the idea that the Prime Minister’s decision to take Enemalta out of Dr Gatt’s hands in 2010 had anything to do with these allegations.
The development comes as yet another e-mail surfaced from Mr Farrugia to the French oil company Total. In it, Mr Farrugia tells an official from the company that he has had meetings with “top officials and the minister”.
Dr Gatt, who at the time of the e-mail (in 2004) was responsible for Enemalta, has repeatedly stressed that although he met Mr Farrugia several times, he never discussed oil tenders with him or anyone else.
mmicallef@timesofmalta.com