GUEST SERIES: Joseph Muscat’s oath (2)

By
2019-07-20T08:56:04+02:00Sun, 21st Jul '19, 08:45|0 Comments

Continues from yesterday’s first post in this series where Godfrey Leone Ganado is analysing extracts from the official transcript of the testimonies of Joseph Muscat and Owen Bonnici in the case filed by Adrian Delia requesting a copy of the Egrant report. The extracts are reproduced in the original Maltese and typing errors have not been corrected.

3.

Dr Vincent Galea: Qed nifhmek sew, Ii inti kellek pariri minghand xi hadd biex ma tippubbkajhiex din l-inkjesta?

Dr Joseph Muscat: Il-Ministru tal-Gustizzja, on the day li sar maghruf li l-inkjesta waslet, qal car u tond li l-Avukat Generali qallu illi ma jaqbilx li jigi ppublikat xejn hlief il-konkluzzjonijiet. Qalli wkoll il-Ministru tal-Gustizzja li din hija il-posizzjoni konsistenti tal-Avukat Generali f’dan ir-rigward.

Dr Vincent Galea: L-Avukat Generali allura lilek direttament ma takx struzzjonijiet biex ma taghmilx dak li int ghidt pubblikament u cioe’ li l-inkjesta tigi ppubblikata?

Dr Vincent Galea: Ix-xhud ghadu kif ikkonferma issa ghal darba darbtejn illi l-Ministru tal-Gustizzja kellu parir minghand l-Avukat Generali sabiex ma jippubblikax din l-inkjesta, issa jien ser insaqsi lix-xhud, isma’ l-Avukat Generali ma qalx hekk, allura kif il-Ministru tal-Gustizzja qed jghidlu hekk? Issa mbaghad insaqsuha lill-Ministru tal-Gustizzja wkoll.

Dr Vincent Galea: L-Avukat Generali qal li huma ma inpona l-ebda kundizzjoni, la lilek, la lill-Avukat tieghek u l-anqas lill-Ministru tal-Gustizzja ghar-rigward ta’ din il-pubblikazzjoni tal-inkjesta, taf biha din?

Dr Joseph Muscat: Turini fejn qalha jekk joghgbok?

Qorti: Meta ircevejt kopja tal-inkjesta, kienx hemm maghha jew wassalx lilek xi kundizzjonijiet dwar il-fatt li issa ghandek il-kopja tal-inkjesta f’idejk u dwar x’ser taghmel biha?

Dr Joseph Muscat: Jien nerga nghid, il-kopja tal-inkjesta wasslitli through l-Avukat tieghi wara li kiteb lill-AG, il-punt fir-rigward tal-posizzjoni tal-AG fir-rigward tal-inkjesta b’mod generali, imma ukoll fil-kaz ta’ din l-inkjesta waslet minn naha tal-Ministru tal-Gustizzja li qalli li l-AG kompla isostni l-punt tieghu, l-parir tieghu f’dak irrigward, kif jaghmel fil-kaz ta’ kwalunkwe inkjesta ohra.

Dr Vincent Galea to the Court: Ha naqralu x’qal l-Avukat Generali u jekk ux konoxxenti ta’ dan il-fatt Sur Imhallef.

Dr Vincent Galea: il-ghaliex ix-xhud qed jghid illi l-Ministru tal-Gustizzja qallu li l-Avukat Generali qallu biex din l-inkjesta ma’ tigix ippubblikata u jien Ghandi d-dikjarazzjoni tal-Avukat Generali bil-gurament issa.

Qorti: Xi tghid?

Dr Vincent Galea: Mela allura ma hemmx pariri, hemm decizjoni, tajt struzzjonijiet biex din l-inkjesta ma tigix ippubblikata, mghoddija lil terzi jekk joghgbok? U l-Avukat Generali qal, le, le ma ghamiltx kundizzjonijiet. Qed insaqsih jekk jafx?

Dr Peter Grech: Semplici hafna, qed nirreferu ghal zewg affarijiet ferm differenti.

Mr Prime Minister – To me, despite your beating about the bush, these questions are very clearly asking you whether the AG, in giving out the report, imposed any conditions on you, when you were given the report through your lawyer. You responded that the Minister of Justice, Owen Bonnici told you very clearly that the AG did not agree with the report being published, except for the conclusions. You insisted on this, even though Dr Vincent Galea stated that the AG had testified under oath, that he did not impose any conditions, neither on your lawyer, nor on the Minster of Justice as to the publication of the inquiry report.

4.

Dr Vincent Galea: Bil-konkluzzjonijiet illi kienu inghataw ghall-konsum tal-pubbliku generali, dawk it-tlett mistoqsijiet biex issir l-inkjesta, kienu jigu sodisfatti jew le? Liema risposta diga wegibha l-Avukat Generali fix-xhieda tieghu.

Dr Joseph Muscat: Ok, mela il-kuntest huwa li dwari u dwar marti saret allegazzjoni gravissima ill b’xi mod jew iehor hadna flus b’korruzzjoni, issemmew miljun ewro u dawn l-affarijiet kollha u din saret b’mod illi waslet ghal distabbilizzazjoni tal-pajjiz, din nghida b’responsabbilita’ kbira. Il-gurnata li harget din l-allegazzjoni, kif ukoll l-aftermath ikkordinat taghha li kien qieghed jilhaq il-climax anke f’dimostrazzjonijiet pubblici organizzati minn uhud, kien l-ghan uniku tieghu li jwassal ghal distabbilizzazjoni politika u anke ekonomika tal-pajjiz u anke sahansiitra wassalni fost affarijiet ohra biex insejjah elezzjoni generali.

It-tieni punt, l-Avukat jekk qed nifhem sewwa qed jghidli, l-konkluzzjonijiet ma kienux bizzejjed ghalik, ghaliex ridt il-kumplament tal-inkjesta, l-ewwelnett, il-konkluzzjonijiet, forsi skas ta’ kwalunkwe ekwivoku, ma sarux xi a bridged version minn naha tal-Avukat Generali jew ta’ terzi, dawk huma konkluzzjonijiet principali li gew abbozati mill-Magistrat inkwerenti stess, imma apparti minn dan il-punt, jien ma kontx naf x’fiha l-ikjesta jew x’fihom il-konkluzzjonijiet, kif nista’ nasal ghall-punt jekk il-konkluzzjonijiet setghux kienu ezawrenti jew le, x’hin rajt ovvjament l-inkejsta kollha, kif ghidt ghadni ma rajthiex kollha, ghadni qed naraha bicca bicca, imma kif qrajt il-parti tal-konkluzzjonijiet irrejalizzajt li l-konkluzzjonijiet tant kemm kienu waterproof li u dar ma’kollox li fil-verita’ tista’ tissodisfa kollox il-konkluzzjonijiet.

Imma nerga nghid Sur Imhallef, jien ghalija tal-iskantament illi fi kwistjoni bhal din fejn sar attentat carissimu ta’ distabbilizzazjoni tal-pajjiz u  li llum gie ippruvat, kien ibbazat fuq gidba u aghar minn hekk fuq dokument iffalsifikat, l-ewwel wiehed li nispicca fl-izbarra nkun jien, meta jien gejt ghand l-Onorabbli Qorti u tlabt il-Qorti li tinvestiga fil-liberta’ kollha, nahseb ghalijka dikhi l-valur ta’ da nil-punt kollu, imma zgur ma kelliex jien sitwazzjoni, aktarx, aktarx, imma din ipotetika, li kieku jien kelli qabel il-konkluzzjonijiet, kont nghid il-konkluzzjonijiet huma bizzejjed, imma fil-verita’ la darba jien ghamilt dik il-pledge politika jien inkompli maghha. Irrid nara l-punti mqajjmin mill-AG fir-rigward u minn nies ohra, fir-rigward tal-privatezza ta’ terzi persuni u t-tieni punt imqajjem pubblikament mill-investigaturi illi dak li jigi ppublikfl-aat ma jfixxkilx fl-investigazzjoni taghhom irrid niedu a konjizzjoni wkoll ghax fl-ahhar mill-ahhar jien ma rridx u nittama li m hawnx min irid li jigi ppublikat xi haga biex jekk hemm ic-cans illi jinqabad il-mohh wara din il-kwistjoni kollha, dan jispicca scot free.

Mr Prime Minister – In my opinion, you did not even try to start answering the question put to you, but you tried to use the opportunity to place on the court records, things which may be visionary to you and illusionary to the informed public.

You immediately go on the defensive, to attack the allegations of corruption regarding your spouse and yourself, and to strongly highlight with declared responsibility that these allegations led to the destabilisation of the country and to its reaching a climax with organised public demonstrations, with the sole aim of causing political and also economic destabilisation, as well as your having to call a general election.

You then make reference to the question as to whether the conclusions were enough for you, and you immediately start digressing again.

You said that you did not know the contents of the inquiry, and neither whether the conclusions were exhaustive or not. Here, you made a slip of the tongue by continuing ‘x’hin rajt ovvjament l-inkjesta kollha’, (translated: ‘when I obviously saw the full inquiry’) and you immediately covered it up by saying, ‘kif ghidt ghadni ma rajthiex kollha’, (‘as I said, I have not yet seen it all’), as I am still reading it bit by bit, but when I read the conclusions I realised it was so waterproof that, in reality, it does satisfy me.

You then carry on by saying that you were surprised that this situation was a clear destabilisation of the country and that today it has been proved it was based on a lie and even worse on a forged document.

You then try to justify your u-turn in publishing the full document, by saying that you have to, after all, take cognisance of the fact that you may be disturbing the investigations, and you hope that there is no one who wants the full publication to have a situation where, if the mastermind of all this is caught, he will go scot free.

Mr Prime Minister – you don’t seem to have as yet understood the conclusions, as the conclusions nowhere state that the allegations are unfounded.

In the final section of my analysis of Joseph Muscat’s testimony, I will revisit those conclusions.

Continues tomorrow.