Socialist MEP Ana Gomes told Newsbook.com.mt that it is very important that the full report of the inquiry by Magistrate Bugeja be published. She said that the publication is very relevant as it could reveal elements that can eventually lead to the uncovering of those who ordered the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The full report, said Gomes, could also throw light on the Panama accounts opened by Minister Konrad Mizzi and Keith Schembri
In a very candid interview, Ms Gomes dismissed the Attorney General as ‘an assistant to the Prime Minister’ and said that if the Prime Minister wants the voluminous report published, it will be published. She said that she expected the full report to be published not just a selection chosen by the Attorney General and ‘spinned off by the government’.
Gomes noted that the report was very much confined by the very specific terms of reference “…magistrate inquiry was defined by the nature of the request made by the Prime Minister to the magistrate as the Magistrate Mr Bugeja said, it was not his job to actually find out who owned Egrant.”
Defining as a red herring the argument of false signatures, an argument Gomes called irrelevant, the Portuguese MEP said that the report needs to be published in full for the truth to be brought to light. “ I want to see the full report and the full conclusions and not just base myself on what has been spinned off with a selective reading of that report.” She insisted that until it is published, she can neither dispute nor confirm the findings, such as they are.
Transcript of the interview
Newsbook: A money laundering case which was written about and detailed about by Daphne Caruana Galizia was the allegation about the company EGRANT. Even earlier this morning, the leader of the Opposition of Malta Dr Adrian Delia was in court arguing that he should be given a full copy of the report of the magisterial enquiry. The conclusion of the report says that the Prime Minister is not the owner of the company and neither is his wife. What do you make of all this?
Gomes: Well I would have expected that the full report, I understand that it is something like 1500 pages, would be published by the Attorney General and not just aselective reading of that report which was put up by the Attorney General and which was spinned off by the government. To me it is clear that the magistrate inquiry was defined by the nature of the request made by the Prime Minister to the magistrate as the Magistrate r Bugeja said, it was not his job to actually find out who owned EGRANT. And to methat report is indeed very relevant because there is a lot of information that could be relevant for a lot of other things namely the cases that have concerned us more in the European Parliament and these cases are obviously related to the revelations on Panama Papers accounts opened by Mr Schembri and Mr Konrad Mizzi, members of the current government. Not only for those cases but for other elements and even eventually for the uncovering of the murder, those who ordered the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia. The publication of that report is very relevant not just of course for the establishing who did not own EGRANT. I must say that one of the arguments that has been used to clear the name of the wife of the Prime Minister , and I do not put in question what were the findings of that report, not at all, that one of the arguments that is being spinned is that this was based on false testimonies and mainly based on the false testimony or the false signature of that lady Jacqueline Alexander or something like that, who was a front woman, so to say, for dozens of phoney companies, of shell companies in Panama. So obviously she had signed over 800 companies as a board member or whatever as a representative of 800 companies, I think we may well assume that most of these 800 companies are fake as it was fake the fact that she was the …board or real representative of these empty companies which were there just to hide to obfuscate who are the real beneficiaries. So that argument is not a relevant argument at all. Yet is was an argument that I see…that I saw often quoted in news mainly in Malta.
Newsbook: Now that you’re mentioning that…
Gomes: I really want to see that report fully published. The 1500 pages because that is how indeed we will clarify what’s going on and it’s of course much more what’s behind EGRANT. It’s relevant for EGRANT and as I said to this day, who indeed…owns EGRANT or for whom Egrant was established. (CROSS TALK) And I understand that even Mr Cini who opened that account and others has been very…evading and not accepting to talk to..not taking questions by the police.
Newsbook: However you mentioned that you stand by the…the…findings which have been published by the enquiry However you also mention that…
Gomes: But I don’t stand by …I don’t know…I’m just telling you that I haven’t read the full enquiry. I do not dispute what was the conclusions but I haven’t seen the full conclusions. I want to see the full report and the full conclusions and not just base myself on what has been spinned off with a selective reading of that report.
Newsbook: So without seeing the full report, would it be …
Gomes: I do not dispute and I do not as well confirm, because I can’t unless I read the full report.
Newsbook: So based on what has been published so far, you mention also that it was based on false testimonies …
Gomes: Why wasn’t it published so far?
Newsbook: The Attorney General is saying that it is not correct to publish the whole document however the Prime Minister of Malta has committed himself to do his best to publish it and his legal team is currently going through the document to see if it can be published.
Gomes: So the Prime Minister (…) because the Attorney General in Malta we know that the Attorney General is also an assistant to the Prime Minister and if the Prime Minister wants it published, I’m sure it will be published.