At least four judges agreed with the family of slain journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia that a very senior police officer should not be involved in the murder investigation because of a possible conflict of interest.

The conflict of interest accusation had been raised immediately after the killing but nobody in authority asked the officer to take a step back to ensure that justice is not only done but also seen to be done. It was only after the family took the matter to court and there were clear pronouncements that he had to pull out of the investigation.

The noble idea that, in certain circumstances and, especially, when dealing with sensitive issues, one is seen to be whiter than white has still not permeated many of this country’s institutions. The culture of resignations and temporary suspension from duties – voluntarily or otherwise – is as rare in this country as snow in summer. It persists even when all eyes are on this tiny country, as happened after Ms Caruana Galizia’s death and the series of corruption allegations levelled at people occupying sensitive offices, even in the financial services world where reputation is a determining factor if a country wants to project itself as a serious and reliable jurisdiction.

The government and the institutions it can ‘control’ are evidently not too worried about all this as statements but the Prime Minister and some of his Cabinet colleagues, notably the finance and justice ministers, prove.

Take the case of Nexia BT partner Karl Cini. He is a certified public accountant and has a diploma in taxation. More importantly, Mr Cini is Nexia BT’s designated money laundering reporting officer, who is appointed in terms of the Prevention of Money Laundering and Funding of Terrorism Regulations. Apart from other duties, including ensuring that all staff members in an organisation are familiar with the provisions of relevant laws, the reporting officer is in duty bound to report any suspicious activities to the authorities.

But what happens when there are suspicions about the money-laundering reporting officer himself, as is the case with Mr Cini?

Mr Cini’s name featured quite prominently in the Panama Papers leaks and the media reports that ensued. The dark shadows that hang over him and, as a consequence, on the firm he works for, persist and are unlikely to be cleared by his stock reply that he cannot speak because he is bound by confidentiality or because magisterial inquiries are in progress.

But that is another issue. The point being made here is that for the authorities – whoever they may be – to continue to accept as a money laundering reporting officer a person who the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit suspects could be involved in illegal activities, and has even asked the police to look into the matter, is mind-boggling.

The situation becomes farcical/tragic – take your pick – when Mr Cini attends a training session on money laundering procedures earlier this week organised by the FIAU itself.

Pity that, in this saga, only the Institute of Accountants appears to have had the backbone to take some action. The FIAU and the Accountancy Board as well as the Institute of Financial Services Practitioners and the Malta Institute of Taxation, of which Mr Cini appears to be a member, prefer to look the other way.

This is a Times of Malta print editorial