The bail conditions for Tancred Tabone and Frank Sammut were raised this afternoon after an appeal by the Attorney General.

Mr Tabone, former chairman of Enemalta and consultant Frank Sammut were arraigned last week in connection with the oil procurement scandal. They were accused of corruption and money laundering.

The two were originally granted bail against a personal deposit of €3,000 and a personal guarantee of €15,000.

Following today's appeal, the bail conditions were raised to a deposit of €25,000 and a personal guarantee of €75,000.

Earlier, during the sitting, Dr Elaine Rizzo Mercieca from the Attorney General's office, said that these were public officials in the highest echelons of the corporation and they had involved themselves in corruption.

The scheme, she said, involved thousands of euro over a period of time, which made this crime very serious.  This was thus a very serious case which merited the re-arrest of the accused. Although the fear of flight or absconding was minimal there was nothing stopping them from leaving and finding refuge in another country where extradition is not possible.

Dr Rizzo Mercieca said the bail conditions created "public alarm" and they needed to reflect the seriousness of the crime.

Furthermore, with regard to the bail conditions, the court had to take into consideration the personal means of the accused. They were not unemployed people, but businessmen. The point of making a personal guarantee was to make sure that bail conditions were adhered to. The courts had to work with a certain uniformity, she said,

Referring to the case of Silvio Zammit, (the businessman accused of trading in influence in the John Dalli case) the lawyer noted that he was first remanded in custody and his deposit was then set at  at €25,000 and personal guarantee of €75,000, even though Mr Zammit had not received one cent from his alleged illegal behaviour.

In another case, Mr Francis Portelli and Mr Tony Cassar were granted bail against tougher conditions than the 'masterminds' of the case Mr Tabone and Mr Sammut.

"It is not in the best interest of justice to have such huge discrepancies between cases", the lawyer said.

She said that in the case the court did not order they re arrest she asked for a deposit to be raised.

Defence lawyers Joe Giglio and Giannella de Marco said that the submissions made by the AG were completely ignoring the basic principle of presumption of innocence. "We cannot ignore that they are pleading not guilty to the charges", Dr Giglio said. "We are disrespecting the court and doing a disservice to the administration of justice by ignoring such basic principles."

This was not the way the judicial process should work, Dr Giglio said. It was as if they were not treating submissions on bail but rather on punishment.

The issue of bail was about whether a person needed to be kept under arrest for the judicial process and not about the gravity of the crime.  

There was no evidence that the accused would abscond, he said. The accused had known since January 22 that they would be charged in court and furthermore they have been granted police bail for five times.

"This is a court of justice and not a gladiators' arena" Dr Giglio said, referring to the submission that there was a public outcry.

Dr de Marco echoed Dr Giglio and said that the fear of absconding could never be taken into consideration. Quoting European case law, Dr de Marco said that precisely what the prosecution was basing their arguments on ie fear of absconding and the severity of the crime, although serious issues should not feature in bail.

There would be a violation of human rights if bail was denied. Mr Tabone has a clean police record, he always worked hard and he was categorically denying the allegations.

"He is being used like a ping pong ball, a political ball, and everyone is forgetting that here we have a person who is presumed innocent.