PL and de Marco bicker about Minister Scicluna

The Nationalist Party’s (PN) spokesperson for finance Dr Mario Demarco said that Edward Scicluna, the Finance Minister, should have resigned, while the Labour Party (PL) said that de Marco is defending the Mafia in Court,

In a letter published in the Times of Malta, Mario de Marco said that Minister Scicluna failed to do his job properly.

According to de Marco, the proof of this lies in the EBA’s damning report , which details that Malta has failed to observe a number of procedures. He goes on to say that Scicluna chose to protect his Cabinet colleagues rather than the officers and authorities under his political wing.

The spokesperson then said that after the EBA verdict, Scicluna chose to attack the EBA. He should have resigned, says de Marco.

PL reaction

In response to the article published by de Marco, the PL said that  he finds himself in a state of denial and in a panic mode due to the fact that “ his beloved party is in tatters” a few months before the Euro parliamentary elections.

According to the PL, it has just been revealed that a number of PN members were conniving with third parties to frame the Prime Minister.

The party concluded by saying that de Marco is not in any position to administer lessons on money laundering issues, due to the fact that he defended  the Ndrangheta (a mafia group) case on money laundering.

De Marco responds

In a press release, de Marco said that Scicluna completely ignored the pertinent points, but rather chose to launch a personal attack.

The spokesperson said that it is a lawyer’s job to defend his clients. He added that the Minister should not be defending an institution whose owner is charged with money laundering activities, and neither should he defend colleagues of his who are the subject of FIAU reports on money laundering activities.

The European Banking Authority concluded that the Government agency against money laundering, the FIAU, failed to supervise Pilatus Bank among a number of shortcomings including deficiencies in procedures and lack in supervision action by FIAU as Pilatus Bank case was closed without the Agency applying sanctions on the bank.