The businessman given a presidential pardon to spill the beans on the oil procurement scandal was yesterday accused of naming a man out of spite because he was left out of a large deal.

Witness had been left out of a huge deal- defence lawyer

The accusation was made when defence lawyer Edward Gatt, appearing for Enemalta’s former financial controller, Tarcisio Mifsud, was cross-examining George Farrugia.

Mr Farrugia testified that Mr Mifsud, together with Enemalta’s petroleum division chief, Alfred Mallia, had received commissions on oil tenders.

This was strongly denied by Mr Mifsud when he had been interrogated by the police. However, Mr Farrugia insisted on his position when investigating officers had the two confront each other.

Mr Farrugia stressed that several meetings had been held and that he had made payments in cash at his office.

Dr Gatt asked whether Mr Farrugia had only mentioned the meetings with his client after he was given the presidential pardon.

Mr Farrugia did not answer and Dr Gatt commented that the only reason why Mr Farrugia had mentioned Mr Mifsud was because he (Mr Farrugia) had been left out of a huge deal.

The lawyer said that Mr Mifsud had brokered an oil deal between Italy’s largest power company, Enel, the Italian government and Enemalta, causing Mr Farrugia to lose a “massive” deal. Mr Farrugia replied that he had to say the whole truth and that was why he had begun naming people.

Earlier in his evidence, he said that he had given about €90,000 in commissions to Mr Mallia and Mr Mifsud and, towards the end of the period in which the commissions were paid, he had been dealing directly with Mr Mifsud.

Mr Farrugia recalled an incident in which Mr Mifsud demanded payment and asked him to go to his office. Mr Farrugia went to the third floor of the Enemalta head office in Marsa after office hours and handed him about €7,000 in cash.

At that meeting, Mr Mifsud told him he would not be getting an upcoming contract because, otherwise, it would be obvious that there was something dodgy going on.

His relationship with Mr Mifsud ended in 2003, when Tancred Tabone –who also stands charged with corruption – became chairman of Enemalta and told him that he was to stop paying Mr Mifsud.

He later found out that Mr Tabone and his consultant, Frank Sammut, also demanded commissions.

Dr Gatt told Magistrate Claire Stafrace Zammit that he was reserving the right to question Mr Farrugia further.

In the proceedings against Mr Tabone, being heard by the same magistrate, defence lawyer Giannella de Marco contested the need for the chairman of the privatisation unit, Emanuel Ellul, to testify, deeming that such evidence was irrelevant.

Mr Ellul testified briefly and said that Mr Tabone and Mr Sammut had hindered the privatisation process of Enemalta’s oil bunkering subsidiary, Mediterranean Offshore Bunkering Company (MOBC).

He said the two men had declared they had no conflict of interest but it later emerged in court that they had a stake in Island Bunker Oils, a firm that received contracts from MOBC.

Dr de Marco said her client was charged with involvement in the oil procurement scandal and not with anything related to the privatisation of MOBC.

Therefore, she insisted, Mr Ellul’s testimony was irrelevant.

The case continues.