I hate to say ‘I told you so’, but…

Published: February 8, 2015 at 5:14pm

farrugia

The Farrugia brothers are to be arraigned on corruption charges by the end of the month, and their other brother George, who is currently under state-mandated immunity from prosecution, will be summoned as a witness for the prosecution.

This is only possible because he is under immunity from prosecution in return for turning state’s evidence. If he were not, the prosecution would be unable to summon him as a witness because under Maltese law the following are not compellable witnesses:

1. parents against children (including adults);

2. children (including adults) against parents;

3. siblings against each other;

4. spouses against each other.

In those relationship situations, people may testify only if they want to, but cannot be summoned against their will. George Farrugia will want to testify against his brothers because the alternative is losing immunity from prosecution.

Even if he had no qualms about testifying about his brothers, without immunity from prosecution he wouldn’t do so, because he might incriminate himself, and witnesses cannot be compelled to testify if they might incriminate themselves. They have the right to stay silent.

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote that the sudden intensity of the campaign to have George Farrugia’s immunity from prosecution lifted, with various stories alleging that he had lied or concealed information, was suspicious. I wrote that there could be only one reason for it: that his brothers are facing imminent prosecution and that they don’t want him to be a witness against them. With immunity from prosecution, he has no choice but to testify against them.

If immunity is lifted, he immediately becomes vulnerable to prosecution himself, and so has the right to remain silent and even the right not to appear on the witness stand at all, citing the sibling relationship.

That turns out now to have been about right.

The real scandal here is that George Farrugia’s brothers, who are clients of Manuel Mallia, escaped prosecution for the duration of his tenure as Police Minister.




14 Comments Comment

  1. Mila says:

    Il-Gvern tal-loop holes.

  2. A+ says:

    There may be other people, apart from his brothers, who do not want him to testify.

  3. Jozef says:

    2015 is not a good year for Taghnalkoll.

    September is eight months away, and no sign of a power station. Anyone noticed how all talk of implementing bill reductions for industry disappeared?

    Armier and San Tumas piling up the pressure on Labour’s amnesty, again hushed up.

    Chetcuti won’t have anything less than the stretch from Xaghra to Marsascala.

    Hunters on the rampage against both parties, a first for Labour. They choose the utter brazen gall to reconsider boycotting the referendum so as not harm Labour’s chances in its traditional strongholds.

    Joe Mizzi can’t get himself to talk sense about traffic and leaves it to the Spanish armada instead.

    Konrad Mizzi refuses to discuss goings on at Mater Dei, Fearne literally improvising hospitals.

    Muscat’s bullish speech this morning nothing but bravado. ‘Serious reservations with the constitutional court’s legal points’, actually comes across as increasingly puzzled at Busuttil’s sharp wit. Muscat just can’t afford anything less than a comfortable majority, whatever that implies.

    He just fell back on his underdog tactic betraying a fear of having to work with a re-sized majority where individual traits and fickle tendencies might outweigh mass in numbers.

    Engaging Muscat objectively can be a refreshing exercise. Just do away with the moralizing sweet talk to see him run for cover.

    Imagine what intercepting the electorate will do to his weak hegemony. Luck can and does change.

  4. bob-a-job says:

    ‘If immunity is lifted, he immediately becomes vulnerable to prosecution himself, and so has the right to remain silent and even the right not to appear on the witness stand at all, citing the sibling relationship.’

    Not only that, but all that he has already testified will not be permitted as evidence.

    On another point.

    Can two gay married people be compelled to testify against each other?

    [Daphne – Obviously not. Spouses are spouses. And I suppose you mean married couples of the same sex, not ‘gay married people’. Plenty of gay people are married to somebody of the opposite sex.]

    Similarly, there are laws that do not allow someone holding an official position to employ a relative, yet no law appears to state that gay partnerships are similarly restricted.

    The LGBTI community won equal rights but those rights now have to be carried all the way.

  5. bob-a-job says:

    ‘China corruption watchdog accuses state energy firms of serious violations’

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/02/06/uk-china-energy-corruption-idUKKBN0LA0YT20150206

  6. canon says:

    So Lawrence Gonzi, the former Prime Minister, acted correctly .

  7. issa naraw says:

    This has all been about weakening the case. Somebody somewhere (main protaganist) is a happy man.

  8. bernie says:

    May I ask. Is it possible that after testifying against his brothers, George Farrugia’s immunity be lifted and he will be prosecuted for not telling the whole truth?

    [Daphne – Of course not.]

    • David says:

      I disagree this immunity can never be lifted once it is a conditional immunity.

      [Daphne – Anything is possible in life, David, but you weigh up the pros and cons. The ‘cons’ of lifting immunity are so disastrous that they militate against the decision of any sensible head of state to lift immunity. For a start, once you set a precedent by lifting immunity, you will never get anyone to turn state evidence again. The cooperation of those who turn state evidence rests on their security.]

  9. mf says:

    I would consider Mr. Farrugia very naive if he doesn’t have a full written account held by a person of trust as ‘insurance’.

  10. Observer says:

    Is there a ‘lunga manus’ of someone who has a very special – if not financial – interest in defending the four brothers who will be arraigned?

  11. Watcher of lies says:

    This has turned out to be less of an oil scandal and more of a Labour scandal. So Muscat’s option is to derail the proceedings by lifting immunity and thus MLP man Tarcisio Mifsud – brother to his mentor, former employer and ally Alfred Mifsud – will benefit together with ex Police Minister Manuel Mallia’s four clients, the Farrugia brothers of John’s Garage.

Leave a Comment