The coat of arms of the National Bank of Malta on top of a Bank of Valletta sign. Photo: Matthew Mirabelli

Jeremy Cassar Torreggiani’s arguments (‘Surplus and deceit’, The Sunday Times of Malta, June 25), have already been fully answered and refuted in court, so there is no need to respond or reply. However, it is important to note that based on his background, he does not appear to be an objective or disinterested observer.

Indeed, he seems to have a strong pecuniary interest in the outcome of the National Bank of Malta shareholders’ claim for compensation. We, on the other hand, have no pecuniary interest whatsoever in the final outcome. We were engaged solely to analyse the facts and evidence and to render an expert opinion.

It also is imperative that your readers are informed of comments made at a meeting held on December 10, 1973 at which both the president and general manager of the National Bank of Malta were present.

The record of that meeting shows that “[the National Bank of Malta representative] indicated that it could be possible for government to take over National National Bank of Malta without putting up any money (that is giving the shares at nil value). The important thing was to safeguard the depositors.”

This statement made by National Bank of Malta officials shows that they had already recognised in mid-December 1973 that the bank was insolvent and its shares had zero value. They knew it then, and all the evidence and analysis since, including the independent report by Deloitte & Co., has reaffirmed that fact.