The government has a minority shareholding, amounting to 25 per cent of the bank’s shares.

In this regard, should the government decide to sell its 25 per cent shareholding in BOV plc, this would simply constitute a divestment of the government’s minority shareholding in the company. This is very different from a privatisation exercise. Indeed, the privatisation of BOV took place years ago, the bank explained.

It said the government’s 25 per cent shareholding entitles it to appoint two directors out of nine on the Board of Directors of BOV plc. One of these is the bank’s chairman.

With regard to the second director, it has been the practice for the government to appoint the staff member chosen by the bank’s employees to represent it on the board.

The bank operates completely independently from any form of government influence. It is the board of directors that determines and approves the bank’s policies and, in so doing, the board is guided exclusively by commercial considerations while being committed to its mission statement and strategic goals.

The bank’s board of directors operates within the country’s regulatory framework and, as a listed company, has to comply with the listing rules issued by the listing authority (the Malta Financial Services Authority) which also incorporates the adopting of a Code of Principles of Good Corporate Governance.

With regard to credit policy, it is the bank, acting completely independently, that designs it. This is approved by the bank’s board of directors. In the most categorical manner, the bank reiterates that all credit decisions are taken independently of any outside interference or influence, and all proposals are assessed through a credit sanctioning structure which takes into consideration each and every proposal on its own merits.

In conclusion, the bank would like to state that the implications made by AD that decisions at BOV are in any way influenced by the government are completely unfounded and incorrect.