The Criminal Court has ordered the police take the necessary steps against Miroslava Milenovic, a forensic accountant appointed during the Vitals hospitals inquiry, after upholding an appeal filed by former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat.

In a judgment delivered on Tuesday, Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera overturned an earlier Magistrates' Court ruling which had found insufficient grounds to proceed against the expert. The judge concluded that there were prima facie grounds for criminal proceedings against Milenovic since she had exercised the regulated profession of accountant without the necessary warrant and committed other offences relating to her professional representations and documentation.

The court directed the Police Commissioner to take the necessary steps against Milenovic.

The case centres on Milenovic's appointment by Magistrate Gabriella Vella on 16 October 2019 as a forensic accountant in the magisterial inquiry into the concession of three public hospitals to Vitals Global Healthcare, subsequently transferred to Steward Health Care. Her assignment involved examining financial records, documentation, electronic data and other material collected during the inquiry into the hospitals concession, as well as transactions involving Technoline Limited.

Milenovic subsequently prepared a report for the inquiry and testified during criminal proceedings arising from the investigation.

Muscat filed a criminal complaint on 13 November 2024, alleging that Milenovic had systematically exercised the profession of accountant in Malta without holding the warrant required under the Accountancy Profession Act. He also alleged that she had received substantial payments from public funds for services which she was not legally authorised to provide.

Muscat’s complaint raised allegations concerning the unauthorised exercise of a regulated profession, false declarations and the alleged misuse of professional titles, among other offences.

Following the police's refusal to proceed with the complaint, Muscat instituted proceedings under Article 541 of the Criminal Code, seeking a court order compelling the police to take action. However, on 17 August 2026, the Magistrates' Court rejected his application, finding that the required prima facie grounds had not been established.

Muscat appealed that decision three days later.

In examining the appeal, the Criminal Court considered the distinction between possessing accountancy qualifications, holding a professional warrant and performing activities legally reserved for warranted accountants. The judgment referred to evidence that Milenovic had described herself as a forensic accountant and had undertaken work in that capacity during the inquiry.

It also considered correspondence involving the Accountancy Board and testimony concerning the requirements for practising accountancy in Malta. The court identified discrepancies in the evidence concerning Milenovic's qualifications and the extent to which her activities required a Maltese professional warrant. Particular attention was given to differing interpretations of whether the duties carried out by a forensic accountant constituted regulated accountancy services.

The court noted that the police had received information suggesting that certain forensic accounting activities might not require a warrant, while other evidence indicated that the services performed could fall within activities reserved for authorised accountants.

Judge Scerri Herrera considered that these conflicting positions required further examination rather than the dismissal of the complaint at the preliminary stage. The judge also considered the investigation itself, including whether sufficient inquiries had been carried out to establish the nature of Milenovic's professional qualifications and whether her activities were legally permissible.

The court observed that the police had not adequately resolved the conflicting information, particularly concerning the professional certification and requirements applicable to Milenovic's work.

A central issue in the appeal concerned the evidential threshold required under Article 541 of the Criminal Code. Judge Scerri Herrera emphasised that proceedings seeking to compel police action do not require the court to determine whether the person complained against is guilty. The court must only assess whether sufficient preliminary grounds exist to justify criminal proceedings.

The judge also examined the earlier court's reasoning concerning the relationship between Muscat's complaint and the ongoing criminal proceedings arising from the hospitals inquiry. The court considered that questions relating to Milenovic's professional authorisation and alleged offences could not simply be excluded from examination because of the existence of other pending proceedings.

The Criminal Court overturned the finding that insufficient prima facie grounds existed for Muscat's complaint.

Judge Scerri Herrera declared that there were grounds for proceedings against Milenovic under Article 3(6) of the Accountancy Profession Act and several provisions of the Criminal Code. The order also covers other offences that may emerge from further police investigations, excluding those which Muscat had withdrawn during the earlier proceedings.

The court ordered the Registrar of Criminal Courts and Tribunals to notify the Police Commissioner of its decision so that the necessary steps could be taken against Milenovic.

The decision was delivered by Madam Justice Consuelo Scerri Herrera.

Lawyers Ishmael Psaila, Charlon Gouder, Etienne Borg Ferranti, Vince Galea and Luke Dalli appeared for Muscat.