Green, Socialist and Liberal MEPs said yesterday they had voted against Leo Brincat’s nomination to the European Court of Auditors “as a matter of principle”.
“There can be no tolerance for anyone associated with the Panama Papers in any way and you have to show no tolerance to this. When allegations of corruption are made, politicians should take a clear stand against it,” Igor Šoltes, a Green MEP from Slovenia, who headed the reporting committee on Mr Brincat’s nomination, said.
A former president of the Slovenian Court of Auditors, Mr Šoltes told the Times of Malta Mr Brincat’s relative silence over the Panama scandal had irked many MEPs who used the vote as a chance to say “this is not OK”.
Mr Brincat had, along with the rest of the Labour parliamentary group, voted against a motion of no confidence in former health and energy minister Konrad Mizzi after he became the only incumbent EU government minister to be mentioned in the massive data leak of secret offshore financial structures.
Other Green MEPs who spoke to this newspaper echoed Mr Šoltes’ sentiments, saying that, while Mr Brincat was relatively qualified for the post, he had not shown adequate transparency to form part of the European Court of Auditors.
Sven Giegold, a German Green MEP, said his main concern about Mr Brincat was the former environment minister’s lack of vocal objection to the Panama Papers scandal. “He should have spoken out,” he said.
Labour has accused the Nationalist MEPs of lobbying against Mr Brincat and ultimately “against the national interest”.
“I am quite sure some of this counter lobbying happened, it is normal. But, in my opinion, it is almost impossible to persuade so many MEPs to vote against a nomination only by having the Opposition party from Malta lobbying for it.
“They are not so influential,” Mr Šoltes said.
Mr Brincat’s nomination was rejected by 381 votes to 229 with 58 abstentions. Czech Liberal MEP Martina Dlabajova said she had voted against because she felt Mr Brincat did not meet the standards of transparency and integrity expected of the Court of Auditors.
“Lobbying by a few MEPs from Malta was absolutely not what led Liberals to vote against Mr Brincat,” she said.
Socialist MEPs said there had been other concerns over Mr Brincat. An investigation into misuse of EU funds at his ministry had caught the eye of many. Also, the fact that he had served as a government minister until recently had raised concerns that he had been nominated for the post due to nepotism rather than qualification, one said.
S&D MEP Ana Gomes said that the vote against Mr Brincat was linked to the Panama scandal.
“I was not lobbied to vote against the nomination. I did my own background checks and reading and found that there were shortfalls.
“Mr Brincat had voted against a motion of no confidence which would have led to more action on the Panama Papers matter,” Ms Gomes, the vice chairwoman of the European Parliament’s committee of inquiry tasked with looking into the Panama Papers, said.