Defence lawyers in the Vitals Global Healthcare case urged the court on Wednesday to take decisive action after key expert witness Jeremy Harbinson again failed to appear for cross-examination.

They argued that further attempts to secure his testimony would only prolong proceedings to the detriment of the accused.

The sitting involved former permanent secretaries Alfred Camilleri, Joseph Rapa and Ronald Mizzi, with the session originally scheduled for Harbinson to be cross-examined. Instead, Stefano Filletti, appearing for the accused, asked the court to summon a representative from the Courts of Justice to formally exhibit all correspondence, including emails and affidavits, submitted by Harbinson over recent months.

According to documents presented in court, Harbinson had repeatedly informed the court by email that he no longer considered himself engaged as a court expert and that he did not wish to testify.

He later submitted a sworn affidavit stating that he had no intention of giving evidence in Malta and had surrendered his warrant as an accountant, declaring he could no longer answer technical or accounting questions. The defence also told the court that Harbinson had liquidated his companies during this period.

Lawyer Franco Debono, part of the defence team, argued that Harbinson was "taking Malta for a ride" by avoiding court while citing threats as justification, and said the Attorney General should take serious decisions on how to proceed given the witness's persistent refusal to cooperate. He added that the accused, who had served the state for years, were being unfairly dragged through prolonged proceedings.

Lawyer Michael Sciriha said any further delays would be prejudicial to the accused, stressing that the uncertainty surrounding the expert's availability was undermining their right to a fair and timely hearing.

The Attorney General's representatives maintained that the prosecution's position remained unchanged and said they did not agree with the defence's submissions.

Filletti told the court that, in light of the exhibited documents, it was now clear that continued attempts to notify Harbinson were futile. He argued that the court should determine whether the expert should be declared unwilling or unable to testify, a finding that would carry legal consequences for the case, and that such a decision should be taken at this stage rather than allowing proceedings to stall indefinitely.

The court invited Filletti to file a formal written request on the matter, after which it will consider how to proceed.