It is not at all convincing for Simon Busuttil to dismiss as “a deviation” the story by Malta Today about Beppe Fenech Adami’s name cropping up in a Dutch investigation into a possible money-laundering operation.

Fenech Adami was a director of a Maltese company, Baltimore Fiduciary, that was handling money for a company possibly being used for money laundering.

Did Busuttil look into the details of the Malta Today story to ascertain the facts? Or are we to assume that Fenech Adami is a saint, incorruptible and not vulnerable to human frailties – as we all are – and so to be believed in his claims that he knew nothing about the matter?

The statement by the Nationalist Party issued on Sunday, when the story appeared, wonders why “Muscat’s government” did nothing “if there is truly something” in the story.

Is it possible Fenech Adami was not told at all about the Dutch police’s request to their Maltese counterparts?

That means that the PN does not at all believe there was “something” in the matter. All that Busuttil needed to do to confirm or otherwise whether there was “something” was to contact the Dutch police to see if there really was “something” in the story. Confirmation was just a telephone call away. Did he make that call?

The PN seems not to have confirmed anything.

It just came out blindly defending its deputy leader.

Busuttil could have done something even simpler. The police commissioner at the time was one appointed by the PN. Did Busuttil contact John Rizzo to ask about the matter? Did he contact former assistant police commissioner Michael Cassar, to whom the report of the police investigations into the matter, as requested by the Dutch police, was handed by the investigating inspector?

Did Busuttil ask Fenech Adami about the story? The PN statement quotes only what Fenech Adami told Malta Today, that he knew nothing about any investigation into the company for which he had been a director.

Busuttil does not seem to have contacted Fenech Adami.

So much for firmness against corruption or possible corruption. Inaction is the word.

Fenech Adami was, at the time of the police investigation, parliamentary assistant with responsibility for the police.

Is it possible that he was not told at all about the Dutch police’s request to their Maltese counterparts and what the Malta police had come across?

The PN statement wonders why the government has done nothing about the matter. A valid question, perhaps, which has been overtaken by events, seeing that the Prime Minister is setting up an official inquiry.

This whole matter calls Marlene Farrugia’s judgement into question. The leader of the Democratic Party has been reported to be in talks with the PN to create an opposition “which will present a united force to the electorate and offer an alternative government based on good governance”, according to The Sunday Times of Malta.

The talks are the result of Farrugia heeding Busuttil’s call for a “coalition against corruption”, according to the report.

I wonder, has Farrugia taken the Malta Today story into consideration now?

The matter of money laundering is a serious one, if it existed in this situation.

It is a crime every government in the democratic world wants to weed out.

Is Farrugia going to ask Busuttil to ascertain the truth of the matter about the Maltese fiduciary company’s affairs?

Or will it turn out to be a “coalition for corruption”?

Roger Mifsud is a retired journalist.