The compilation of evidence against former Mimcol CEO Mario Mizzi, who stands charged with offering a bribe in his capacity as a public official, started this morning.
In May 2010, the Prime Minister had asked the Commissioner of Police to investigate claims made to an official of the Office of the Prime Minister in September that somebody involved in the adjudication of a call for tenders had requested money.
Taking the witness stand, Assistant Commissioner Michael Cassar said the police began to investigate this case following a parliamentary question by Opposition leader Joseph Muscat to the Prime Minister on cases of bribery in the superyacht adjudicating board.
AC Cassar said Mr Mizzi approached Paul Cardona, a member of one of the bidding consortiums, and he told the police that Mr Mizzi had told him 'if you look after me I am willing to help you out'.
Mr Cassar also said that a company taking part in this bidding process, SYC, was first given 71% in the technical aspect of their tender bid, which amount was eventually lowered to 50% and then to 48%.
These percentage points were awarded and deducted by Sue Hall, who worked as a consultant awarding these technical aspects.
AC Cassar said the fact that Mr Mizzi had communicated with Ms Hall via e-mail and that the percentage points given to this company were downgraded, coupled with the fact that Mr Mizzi had allegedly tried to bribe Mr Cardona, was overly suspicious and this was the line of investigation taken by the police
In cross examination, defence lawyer Joseph Giglio pointed out that it was the whole adjudicating board that had asked Ms Hall to downgrade the company since it did not meet the technical aspects of the tender.
It was not his client who in any way forced or pressured Ms Hall to downgrade, he stressed.
Dr Giglio said irrelevant of whether or not there was a prima facie case against his client, what he was ultimately interested in was his client's acquittal.
Magistrate Antonio Mizzi remarked to the prosecution that it was 'risky' whether or not there was a prima facie case. He later ruled that there was a prima facie case and deferred the case to March 7.