The emblem of the National Bank of Malta. Photo: Darrin Zammit Lupi

In connection with the case of the National Bank of Malta, may I recommend to the members of this government that they watch the excellent movie Woman in Gold.

It tells the story of a painting by Gustav Klimt which was looted from a Jewish family by the Nazis after the Anschluss.

The claim for restitution was made by the heir of the family from which it was stolen, anelderly lady living in the US.

The painting, a portrait of this lady’s aunt, hung in an Austrian museum, where it had become a major icon of Austrian art, valued at more than$100 million.

The claim for restitution went through all the means available to the claimant, including the US Supreme Court which ruled in favour of the claimant.

The Austrians fought tooth and nail to hang on to thepainting, and refused any offers of compromise. Eventually they agreed to arbitration in Austria, where the decision would be binding. The arbitrators decided that the painting should be restored to its rightful owner, and it has ended up in an American museum.

There are similarities between this case and the claims made by the heirs of the original shareholders of the National Bank of Malta.

The Maltese case may well move on to the European Court and if that Court were to decide in favour of the plaintiffs, the government would be in duty bound to settle.

The danger is that, far-fetched as it may seem, the European Court decrees that the government should use its best efforts to restore the Status Quo Ante – and that would be very expensive. Eventually justice prevails in these cases.

The government should settle this case in the public interest, before it leaves these shores.