MEP David Casa spent over an hour giving evidence behind closed doors before the inquiring magistrate on Monday morning where he presented him with the FIAU report which he claims links Minister Konrad Mizzi with corruption.
Mr Casa said he could not divulge what was discussed as the court had bound him to secrecy.
The "damning" report he presented, concluded in March 2017, includes "details of schemes, systems, behaviour and collusion in corruption and money laundering, involving officials at the highest levels of the Maltese government".
Read: "You're obsessed with me," Konrad Mizzi and David Casa in war of words as court evidence looms
"I have trust in the justice system and the magistrate (Aaron Bugeja) and the work he is doing and I respect his choice that I should not discuss what was said," he told reporters.
"I worry when I see the weakening of the democratic institutions. I came to fulfil my duty in the name of the Maltese people and came to the court of magistrates... I have no faith in the police or the commissioner of police."
As promised, this morning I met Magistrate Aaron Bugeja in private to discuss the #FIAU report. Where responsible institutions fail us, I will ensure justice will be served.@AzzopardiJason @PNmalta @EPP_MT pic.twitter.com/YIwRbX74M0
— David Casa (@DavidCasaMEP) February 19, 2018
Mr Casa rejected suggestions from a One News reporter that he was working against Malta, insisting that he was working against a government that was “making Malta the object of ridicule abroad.”
Asked about the case and former minister Manuel Mallia's suggestions that action should be taken against the MEP if the FIAU information was revealed, Dr Mizzi insisted that he trusted the judiciary.
Speaking to reporters on Monday, the minister said he remained confident that “not one transaction” would be found.
“They can look at all the banks in the world,” a calm Dr Mizzi said, adding that he “trusts the rule of law in this country, 100 per cent.”
Dr Mizzi added that he would not be commenting about the case further since it was now under judicial consideration and therefore prohibited from public discussion.