The criminal case against the former acting CEO of the Malta Tourism Authority (MTA), over the Mistra scandal, was left in tatters yesterday as a defence lawyer ploughed head on into the final arguments.
This simple case had caused four years of trauma for George Micallef
Armed with a timeline of events, lawyer Joseph Giglio said this “simple” case had caused four years of trauma for George Micallef, who stands charged with making a false declaration through a report he drew up in October 2007.
The case began following a three-month police investigation that was launched after the Labour Party, shortly before the March 2008 general election, alleged there had been corruption in the way a planning permit for an open air disco was issued for land in Mistra owned by Nationalist MP Jeffrey Pullicino Orlando.
Two other men, Philip Azzopardi, former chairman of a Development Control Commission (DCC) board, and Anthony Mifsud, a former board member, were charged with taking a private interest in the adjudication of the permit. They were acquitted in 2009.
In his report, Mr Micallef advised that the development would be in line with the tourism policies of the Malta Tourism Authority.
Dr Giglio made an animated two and-a-half hour speech, in which he at times shouted and banged his fists as he made his legal points.
He submitted that Mr Micallef, who is currently president of the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (MHRA), did not and could not have had the intention to draw up a false report.
The case worried him because he was being forced to prove his client’s innocence when it was the duty of the prosecution to prove that he had drawn up a false report – and they had failed to do so.
Every witness the prosecution produced said there was nothing wrong with Mr Micallef’s report and even the former MTA chairman Sam Mifsud publicly declared that he stood by it, the lawyer said.
The application to develop the land had been filed in September 2005 and Mr Micallef was approached in May 2006 by Dr Pullicino Orlando and told that someone was going to ask him about tourism policies. The MP did not specify how and why and did not mention that he was the owner of the land in question, Dr Giglio said.
He added that the developer of the land, Dominic Micallef, using his cousin Ian Sultana – so that his competitors would not be alerted to the development – asked Mr Micallef to draw up a report about the development to submit to the MTA in order to secure a tourism compliance certificate without which the application could not be processed further. In his report, Mr Micallef made reference to a policy report (which had also been penned by him) which supported the idea of having a discotheque in the area.
The police could not find this policy document and consequently accused him of drawing up a false report, when this policy document existed at the Malta Tourism Authority.
So his client was in the dock, Dr Giglio said, because the police could not find the document.
Later, in September 2007, Mr Micallef found himself discussing this project again at the planning authority but this time in his role as consultant to the Malta Tourism Authority – a role which Dr Giglio pointed out his client was perfectly entitled to hold.
During the Mepa meeting, which included liaison officer Lawrence Vassallo, Dr Pullicino Orlando, Mr Micallef and two planning officers, his client was asked to produce a report saying that the MTA supported the project, Dr Giglio said.
Mr Micallef asked for this request to be made in writing and a letter with the request arrived on Friday, September 28, 2007, when Mr Micallef together with another man, Mario Attard from the MTA, were due to travel to Zurich for a conference on the Sunday.
Mr Micallef was asked for the report to be drawn up quickly. The two men (the accused and Mr Attard) discussed the matter and concluded that Mr Micallef should do it since he was familiar with the subject.
The report was practically the same thing as the first and was sent to their secretary to send it off, the lawyer said.
Dr Giglio told Magistrate Marseann Farrugia that she had two options, either find Mr Micallef not guilty and stop there or to find Mr Micallef not guilty and to ask for an investigation into how the case was handled.