So the Attorney-General DID say that John Dalli should be charged and prosecuted
Am I remembering things incorrectly? Because I seem to recall Peter Paul Zammit saying, when he was Police Commissioner and his first act was to close the case against John Dalli, that the Attorney-General had advised him there were no grounds for prosecution.
But maybe I’m a little confused, because earlier today the chief investigator on the Dalli case (Angelo Gafa), who Zammit removed immediately he was made Police Commissioner when Labour got into government, said that the AG had given written and verbal advice that Dalli should be prosecuted.
Gafa was speaking before the House Privileges Committee, in the hearing of a complaint brought by the prime minister against the Opposition leader. The basis of Muscat’s complaint is Busuttil’s accusation, made in parliament, that Muscat used his influence to intervene with the police and halt Dalli’s prosecution.
There is little doubt now that somebody did indeed intervene to stop Dalli being charged. I have the strangest feeling that I know where all this is going: the buck is going to stop at a door overlooking Hastings Garden in Valletta. Well, actually at a villa at Ta’ Cenc, given how that’s his official registered address.
23 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20150114/local/police-had-felt-international-arrest-warrant-could-be-issued-against-john-dalli-committee-told.551855
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-01-14/local-news/Former-Police-Commissioner-did-not-act-on-AG-advice-to-charge-John-Dalli-former-investigator-6736128717
I too recall the former Police Commissioner, Peter Paul Zammit, claiming that the AG had advised against prosecution.
I wondered at the time why the AG, before the general elections, was for Dalli’s prosecution and then changed his mind afterward.
It looks, now, like Zammit was lying when he said that.
On a separate matter, in tonight’s Public Accounts Committee hearing, Dr Gonzi explained his government’s strategy on energy from 2006 to 2013.
Now that this government has got itself entangled in a mess, its predecessor’s approach seems to be far more sensible.
Reliability of energy supply was a main concern. Based on expert advice, the interconnector would provide the most reliable supply, more than gas supplied by seaborne tankers.
John Dalli should wear striped prison clothes full-time just in case.
So, il- forka ghall-izvinturat.
If you are a politician you are untouchable.
Is this fair?
Unless Dalli clears his accusations in court we will remain doubtful.
We will also remain doubtful of the authorities concerned.
This will continue to haunt them for many years to come.
Just “doubtful?” “fair?”
I don’t know about others, but “doubtful” seems to me a tad tame.
Instead of “fair” I’d put legal, ethical, admissible. Does it fit the mandate? Is this what the constitution provides for?
“Haunt:” This lot are so amoral, I doubt anything but envy and greed for more haunt them nightly.
The one-million dollar question is “Did the Prime Minister ,Joseph Muscat, know about the AG’s advice to charge John Dalli”.
No, no no. That is not the question that should be asked.
When Joseph Muscat appointed Dalli as consultant he knew very well that the intention of former Police Commissioner Rizzo prior to the elections was to prosecute.
When appointing someone, government should do proper checks on his or her background and in the case of Dalli, the need for checks was even greater. The PM could have easily asked the AG about his intentions re Dalli.
The PM’s appointment of John Dalli (after he was “cleared” by the Police Commissioner) was intended to rehabilitate Dalli’s name.
Should we worry about our latest Commissioner of Police who declared that action will be taken if new evidence emerges? When he should be taking action on evidence and recommendations he already has in hand?
Here it is: http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/dalligate/27430/no-case-against-john-dalli-police-commissioner-and-attorney-general-20130609#.VLdyVIF4WrU
Police Commissioner Peter Paul Zammit has declared that there is no criminal evidence to arraign or accuse former “EU health commissioner John Dalli on grounds of corruption or trading in influence over the allegations that he was aware of a €60 million bribery attempt by one of his political canvassers.
Zammit on Saturday said that the police investigations in relation to the report by the EU’s anti-fraud agency OLAF were ongoing, but as things stand there was no evidence to incriminate John Dalli. He added that he had already consulted with Peter Grech, the Attorney General, who agreed with his assessment.”
Whoever it was that stopped Dalli from being prosecuted should be prosecuted themselves for perverting the course of justice.
There is, to my knowledge, no crime of perverting the course of justice in Malta, unless we are dealing with false evidence or perjury.
Nahseb tirrangja. Art 135 of the Criminal Code would be a good one to use.
The most relevant question that has to be answered is: who was responsible for removing all police officers who were on the point of indicting John Dalli?
Definitely, the minister responsible for the police is accountable, but does a minister take such a decision without the actual involvement of his prime minister?
The decision of the new (he is already former, and this does not reflect well on his performance) Commissioner, P.P. Zammit to go against the opinion of all police officers who had been involved in investigating John Dalli, without any evidence that he had actually studied the investigations, is also very relevant.
As for the A.G., we have evidence that he recommended indictment. Unless there is evidence to the contrary, this stands, and the performance of P.P. Zammit, and those who appointed him, is suspect.
Angelo Gafa’ is also Saviour’s pet infidel. Columns filled with why Gafa’ should be dismissed and banished.
Malta Today, a newspaper painfully divided between the ones who’d like to take it forward and one who’ll use its column inches to “say it ‘as it is'”.
Who is going to shoulder responsibility for this wrongdoing?
It is worrying enough that we have lost faith in the police corps but now losing faith in the AG is going too far.
The whole truth and nothing but the truth.
That’s exactly what’s lacking in the Dalli case.
No case against John Dalli – Police Commissioner and Attorney General – 10 June 2013
http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/dalligate/27430/no-case-against-john-dalli-police-commissioner-and-attorney-general-20130609#.VLgAGi5G9mM
Former Police Commissioner did not act on AG advice to charge John Dalli – investigator – 14 January 2015
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-01-14/local-news/Former-Police-Commissioner-did-not-act-on-AG-advice-to-charge-John-Dalli-former-investigator-6736128717
Quoting some one should be done faithfully. May I suggest you have a listen to the publicly available recording of the evidence given by all investigators in the Dalli case. Rizzo did not arraign Dalli because he wanted to question him again, Cassar did not agree to charge Zammit and Dalli separately, and Gafa after an hour’s discussion compromised to let the case stand till Silvio Zammit’s case is decided or unless as Peter Paul Zammit stated from day one, there is evidence available to link the circumstantial evidence so aptly named unambiguous by Kessler which same Kessler has refused to testify in substance of, on at least two different occasions, not even by video conferencing. Who is hiding the truth? It is a very pertinent question here.
I quoted the newspapers faithfully and I have provided the links.
My point was simply to show the contrast between newspapers leaving others to decide whether there are hidden agendas somewhere.
If what the newspapers write is correct then the AG’s advice differed according to who was in power.
Did the AG accommodate the PN and demand Dalli’s arrest or did he accommodate the MLP and say there is no case against Dalli?
Which of the newspspers is not reporting faithfully and above all, why?
It’s quite a crowd that has those special villas in Ta’ Cenc.
Daphne
As for the clever person who quoted Art 139 of the Criminal Code, definitely does not know what he is saying, look it up it’s easy….
Bob-a-job
My point exactly, quotes should be from the original, quoting newspapers that differ in their quotes is simply adding speculation and not helping the general public in reaching an informed decision.