Alfred Degiorgio and his brother George Degiorgio, both accused of murdering journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in October 2017, today issued a second statement stating that they were and are still prepared to say the whole truth.

By means of this second statement whilst making reference again to the fact that they made requests to the President of the Republic of Malta for the granting of a Presidential Pardon (George Degiorgio on the 10th March, 2021 and Alfred Degiorgio on the 22nd March, 2021) and to give all the information they have in connection with the accusations made against them and with other crimes which happened in the past which information is direct, known personally to them and not mere hearsay or detto del detto, inform all those who have an interest that until today they have not heard anything about their requests.

This situation ledthem to ask the following questions:

1. What is holding the authorities and institutions from formally acknowledging receipt of their requests?

2. What is holding the authorities and institutions from considering their requests seriously and expeditiously?

3. Why is it that in the case of Melvin Theuma a Presidential Pardon was given to him in a very short period of time by a decision of the ex-Prime Minister acting alone whilst in their case they have not heard anything about their requests after the lapse of a considerable period of time? 

4. Why does the State prefer to consider and grant Presidential Pardons to a third party who, as has already resulted from his testimony, does not have direct evidence but is relying on what he says that they have told him? 

5. Why does the State does not wish to hear what they have to say and consider the information they have in accordance to law?

6. Could it be the case that the authorities, the institutions and finally the State do not want to consider their requests in the manner contemplated by law because they advised that the information they have should lead in the case of the homicide of Daphne Caruana Galizia, amongst others, to a mastermind who was a Government Minister and therefore there exists a serious conflict of interest in those who in accordance to law should give their recommendation about the requests made by them?

7. Could it be the case that the authorities, the institutions and finally the State do not want to consider their requests in the manner contemplated by law because they advised that the information they have should lead to a mastermind who was a Government Minister and present day sitting Minister in other cases where very serious crimes have been committed and therefore there exists a serious conflict of interest in those who in accordance to law should give their recommendation about the requests made by them?

8. Is it not the case that the State wants to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the case of the homicide of Daphne Caruana Galizia and in other serious cases? If the State does indeed want to know, why all this delay?

9. Is it conceivable that their requests are considered with justice, serenely, in accordance to law, in an independent and impartial manner when the Cabinet of Government Ministers who is supposed to give its recommendation on their requests, is asked to decide whether to recommend the granting of a Presidential Pardon in connection with the naming of and the giving of information about the sitting Government Minister forming part of the Cabinet of Government Ministers who was involved in very serious crimes?

10. Is it conceivable that their requests are considered with justice, serenely, in accordance to law, in an independent and impartial manner when the Cabinet of Government Ministers who is supposed to give its recommendation on their requests, is asked to decide whether to recommend the granting of a Presidential Pardon in connection with the naming of and the giving of information about the person who was a Government Minister forming part of the Cabinet of Ministers previous to the present one and was involved as a mastermind in the case of the homicide of Daphne Caruana Galizia?

11. Which democratic State which has this type of requests based on the giving of such information ignores and does not reply to said requests and does not send for those who make the same requests?

12. Are these the circumstances which are holding back that their requests are considered inaccordance to law because the State is protecting itself from itself and its own wrong doing?