The electoral campaign of 2013 was dominated by the oil scandal and one of its protagonists was George Farrugia. Going over these events and trying to analyse them through the new information that is resulting from Panamagate, I am asking myself why a number of basic questions have never been asked and why a number of individuals, who in different ways were protagonists in the oil scandal then, are continuing to surface in political debates till this very day.

Let’s start from the issue of the super candidates. A number of Labour super candidates were in one way or another linked to the issue of purchasing fossil fuel. Manwel Mallia was one of Labour’s chosen super candidates. I don’t believe that Labour supported Mallia because of his brilliant career as a criminal lawyer. Looking back on those events, the choice must have been tied to the information related to this scandal. 

Lawrence Gonzi played into Muscat’s hands when he opted for a long political campaign. This was a big mistake. Labour had all the time to tap and speak about this scandal and Muscat had all the time in the world to pick and choose the persons to be mentioned and those to omit from his political discourse. Undoubtedly, Labour had learned from the Mistra scandal and did not leave the news about the oil scandal for the last day of the election campaign as Alfred Sant had done. The documents of the Mistra scandal were disclosed on the last day of the electoral campaign and the newspapers could not report it, as it was the day of electoral silence. When the story was picked up, it was a week after the results but by then, it was too late.

Yet, despite the knowledge that Mallia has about this case, he was not one of the individuals called to appear before PAC. Why?

Mallia was not the sole lawyer presented as a super candidate by Labour in the 2008 election. Another super candidate was the young advocate David Farrugia Sacco. Unfortunately, Farrugia Sacco was the only super candidate who did not make it to Parliament in the 2013 election. But once again, no one dared to ask David Farrugia Sacco to appear before PAC to testify about this case.

The third super candidate chosen by Labour was Konrad Mizzi. Mizzi was presented as the saviour of Malta but despite the fact that he worked at Enemalta, at no stage throughout the controversy did anyone ask whether he knew George Farrugia or if George Farrugia knew him. I am stating this because George Farrugia was presented as the person who knew all the officials and the persons at Enemalta. During the electoral campaign, Mizzi was presented as one of Enemalta’s brilliant employees who had been put aside (we were conveniently told) by Austin Gatt. Thus, it seems to me extremely bizarre that the Public Accounts Committee did not feel the need to ask Konrad Mizzi to appear and ask him under oath the simple question of whether he knew George Farrugia before 2013. 

Instead what we have witnessed is the abrupt closure of PAC on the grounds that PAC had exhausted its list of witnesses and could not proceed until constitutional cases initiated by a number of key witnesses (i.e. Tancred Tabone and Frank Sammut) are concluded.  How very convenient. Hence the Committee adjourned sine die and as a result no date has been set for a next meeting. In theory the committee has not been dissolved, as a member could write to the secretary of the committee to reconvene PAC but in practice, it is a legal form to put a case in abeyance. In the meantime, it has been publicly demonstrated that this PAC is just another kangaroo court.

There are other issues, which I think need to be checked by journalists in the wake of this Panamagate scandal. Normally, when the Prime Minister is with his back to the wall, he diverts attention to other topics. The topic chosen by the Prime Minister on this occasion was Gay Marriage. Why did he not refer to the oil scandal? For example, as the PM, he could have asked for George Farrugia’s pardon to be revoked. The Prime Minister has never resorted from words to action and formally advised the President to revoke this pardon or put pressure on the Attorney General to prove that George Farrugia is lying before the court.

Panamagate is showing that Konrad Mizzi is held in higher esteem than Manuel Mallia by the Prime Minister. After resisting for some time, the Prime Minister succumbed to the pressure and removed Mallia from office. Different seems to be the issue with Konrad Mizzi. Muscat is hell bent on defending him to the end, in the same way that he is now all out to defend the pardon given by Gonzi to George Farrugia.

It would be interesting to know who put pressure on Gonzi to give Farrugia that famous pardon, which was cause of great political controversy during the last general election. Could the protagonist behind this pardon today, form part of the Tagħna lkoll system? This is a question that only Gonzi can answer.