Former prime minister Joseph Muscat has hit back at former Chief Justice Vincent De Gaetano over his account of why he withdrew from consideration to chair the public inquiry into the assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, insisting that all communication with De Gaetano was conducted in writing and concerned only logistical matters.

De Gaetano said this morning that he initially agreed to chair the inquiry but subsequently withdrew after what he described as "constant attempts at interference" in how it would operate. He said he feared he would become involved in "constant skirmishes" and felt he was being used.

In a Facebook post responding to De Gaetano, Muscat said the former chief justice had every right to interpret events as he understood them, but argued that the public was entitled to have all the facts.

Muscat said he had taken several hours before responding because he wanted to verify all the points involved.

According to Muscat, all communications with De Gaetano were made in writing by the justice minister at the time, Owen Bonnici, and took place before the former chief justice's appointment had been finalised.

He said the correspondence concerned logistical issues and the way the inquiry would operate, including a proposal for hearings to be held at the law courts, in public but without television cameras, in line with normal practice at the building.

"If someone wanted to interfere, they would not have done so in writing," Muscat argued.

De Gaetano has said he was approached by Bonnici while he was serving as Malta's judge at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. He recalled telling the minister that he was prepared in principle to chair the inquiry, subject to seeing its terms of reference and ensuring they were acceptable to the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly and the Caruana Galizia family.

Muscat also sought to contrast De Gaetano's experience with that of retired Judge Michael Mallia, who ultimately agreed to chair the inquiry.

He said the same type of communications held with De Gaetano subsequently took place with Mallia, but that neither Mallia nor anyone else involved in the inquiry had alleged that there had been an attempt to interfere with its work.

The inquiry, Muscat said, ultimately operated independently and was able to conduct its proceedings and reach its conclusions.

He pointed to instances in which government representatives were excluded from certain hearings or were allowed to attend only on condition that they did not participate.

He also noted that witnesses were permitted to testify behind closed doors when the inquiry considered this appropriate.

"De Gaetano did not want to take on the inquiry, but this was simply his decision," Muscat said.

The dispute follows renewed discussion of the circumstances surrounding the establishment of the public inquiry, which concluded its work in 2021 after examining whether the assassination could have been prevented and the wider institutional circumstances surrounding it. The inquiry was ultimately chaired by Mallia and included retired Chief Justice Joseph Said Pullicino and Judge Abigail Lofaro.