Former Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi said today that he was satisfied that within four weeks of the former government having granted a pardon to oil trader George Farrugia, seven persons were arraigned in court in connection with the oil procurement scandal, whereas under the present government, no one was arraigned and the investigative team was dismantled.

Dr Gonzi was replying to questions in his third appearance before the Public Accounts Committee in connection with the oil procurement scandal.

He said that strangely, it was only after he last appeared before the committee that action was being taken against some other people.

Follow the sitting live below. Text is underneath.

 

Justice Minister Owen Bonnici asked Dr Gonzi today whether his authorisation was requested for the police or others to investigate Mr Farrugia on the basis of his tax records.

Dr Gonzi said he did not recall, but he did not think so. In any case, he always upheld such requests.

Dr Bonnici asked whether there had been any ministers who were against the granting of the pardon to Mr Farrugia.

Dr Gonzi said the decision was taken in a late night meeting of the Cabinet on February 8, 2013, attended by the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner. It was the AG who prepared the drafts of the pardon. The Commissioner had recommended the granting of the pardon and it was on his advice and that of the AG, that the Cabinet decided in favour of the pardon.

He could not recall if any ministers were absent from the Cabinet meeting but none of those present or absent had expressed reservations about the pardon.

Dr Gonzi recalled that after the oil scandal was revealed, calls had been made (by Frank Portelli and Arnold Cassola) for Parliament to be recalled to enact a Whistleblower Act.

Dr Gonzi said he had been of the view that this did not apply in this case, but he had declared, as reported on timesofmalta.com, that he was ready to grant a pardon to whoever was prepared to give information on the case.

The then assistant police commissioner, Michael Cassar heard those comments and the possibility was raised with the suspect (George Farrugia), who indicated he was prepared to cooperate. 

That was conveyed to then Police Commissioner John Rizzo who phoned him at Castille to verify if this could take place. 

The Cabinet then met and the pardon was granted.

As a result of the pardon, seven persons were arraigned in connection with the case within four weeks.

Asked if he was satisfied with the pardon, Dr Gonzi said he was not there to say whether he was satisfied or not, but in his opinion, the fact remained that within four weeks of the granting of the pardon, seven persons were taken to court.

What he was not satisfied about was how, in the two years since Labour was elected, no one else was arraigned and the whole investigating team was, within two months, dismantled. Every one of the investigators was transferred.

Interjecting, Dr Bonnici said one of the investigators was now commissioner.

I am totally dissatisfied with the judicial process, or the parliamentary process, Dr Gonzi said.

The only thing that had happened was that after he last gave evidence before the committee, action was to be taken against some people. This was very strange. Such things did not happen elsewhere.

Amid angry exchanges, committee chairman Jason Azzopardi and Beppe Fenech Adami (PN) said it was clear that the government wanted to withdraw the pardon to get some people off the hook and the case against people already taken in court would be prejudiced and they would be acquitted.

Dr Bonnici denied that was the case. He pointed out, however, that the pardon conditions made it mandatory on the authorities to withdraw the pardon if  Mr Farrugia did not say the truth and the whole truth.

Dr Gonzi observed that former Police Commissioner John Rizzo had told the committee that the pardon was instrumental for the police investigations and subsequent arraignments. Inspector Angelo Gafa had also spoken of how the pardon enabled the police to unearth evidence against three people about whom the police had previously had no evidence.

The testimony of (Commissioner) Cassar and (Superintendent) Vassallo had also shown how the pardon led to the arraignment of seven people.

Asked whether he had told the Cabinet that he had known Cathy Farrugia, George Farrugia’s wife, Dr Gonzi said the recommendation to grant the pardon was made by the Commissioner and Cathy Farrugia was irrelevant to this point.

Dr Gonzi said he had not felt the need to tell the Cabinet that she had requested a meeting which he had refused. He found it offensive that the government side tried to insinuate that the pardon had been granted as a favour to Mrs Farrugia, when he had even refused to meet her on something which was much less important.

Tourism Minister Edward Zammit Lewis asked if Finance Minister Tonio Fenech, who was responsible for Enemalta, was present for the Cabinet meeting that decided on the pardon.

Dr Gonzi said he could not recall, but the issue was the pardon and not Enemalta as such. The priority was to identify and take people to court. Once the Commissioner of Police, accompanied by the Attorney General, had recommended a pardon, who was he to refuse to give it? What would have happened had he ignored their advice?

Dr Bonnici noted that Mr Farrugia had declared that unless one bribed people, he stood no chance of receiving a contract. 

Dr Gonzi said he agreed that this was a serious declaration. However, since 2005, when procedures were changed, there were no reports of such goings on.

Asked if he could have done more to avoid what happened (before 2004), Dr Gonzi said one could never be happy with what had been done but structures had also existed at the time.

Asked if he had asked the responsible minister to account for what had happened under his watch, Dr Gonzi pointed out that the corruption happened before 2004 and was revealed in 2013, possibly by someone who had an interest to reveal it weeks before a general election. Whoever had the information should have revealed if before, not use it for electoral purposes.

Dr Gonzi said that within 24 hours he, as prime minister, took the necessary action leading to the arraignment of seven people.

But one still needed to ask: did anyone know that corruption was going on but withheld the information to utilise it in a general election, as had happened? It was sad that somebody had used corruption for political ends.

Dr Gonzi said his attack was against whoever held the information and did not tell the police, not whoever published the information.

Asked about the gift of a clock given to Finance Minister Tonio Fenech, Dr Gonzi said a statement had been issued by the then minister, who had also given an explanation to the police.

The then Commissioner of Police had told him (Dr Gonzi) that investigations had not led to any minister being under suspicion.

Replying to questions by Justyne Caruana, Dr Gonzi said he had replaced Tancred Tabone as chairman in 2004, soon after he became prime minister, but had not known of any irregularities. Had he known then what he knew now, he would not only have replaced him, he would have sent him to prison.