Prime Minister Robert Abela on Monday defended his insinuation that it would be “political terrorism” if an inquiry into the Vitals hospitals privatisation deal has truly been concluded now, weeks before an election.

Speaking to journalists, Abela said that if it was true that the magisterial inquiry had just been wrapped up, the trust in the judiciary would be undermined, given its timing close to an election.

His remarks were criticised by the Chamber of Advocates, which described them as an attack on the judiciary, while the Nationalist Party said the PM was being paranoid.

Malta will be voting to elect its six representatives on the EP and for the local councils on 8 June.

On Monday, Abela said he would not speak about the merits of any particular case or any person but about his fears that confidence in the judicial process would be undermined by actions seen as interfering with the electoral process.

The magisterial inquiry into the hospitals deal, which sees former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat at the centre, was established in 2019.

The inquiry should have been concluded in 60 days, yet it had taken four-and-half years, the PM said.

Abela said he hoped it was not true that the magistrate had, of all days, picked the day when the candidates submitted their nominations to submit her report. That would be known on Tuesday, when the Attorney General will be asked in court whether she has received the report.  

Asked by Malta Today what his reaction would be if the magistrate in her report called for police action against former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, Abela said he could not comment on hypothetical situations.

When asked directly if he would consider recommendations to charge Muscat as “political terrorism,” Abela replied that he would not speak about hypothetical cases.

“No one is a fool,” Abela noted, as he spoke about his suspicions regarding the conclusion of the inquiry.

The inquiry was initiated on Repubblika’s initiative, originally targeting former ministers Chris Cardona, Konrad Mizzi and Edward Scicluna but was later widened to include Muscat.

Muscat had tried to remove the magistrate from the inquiry, insisting she had a conflict because her relatives were publicly critical of him. He also complained of constant leaks from the inquiry and decried the magistrate’s refusal to let him testify before her.

In reaction, the Nationalist Party (PN) said that Robert Abela's latest attack on the judiciary undermined the judiciary's independence and its efforts to investigate police shortcomings over the years.

It said Abela's remarks on the Inquiring Magistrate were irresponsible and dangerous, emphasizing that his actions contradict his oath of office as Prime Minister.

In reply, the Labour Party said the PN leader should agree with Abela that justice must be "just and honest" and not detemined by electoral timings. It is strange that "the PN and the establishment" are considering this as an attack.

The Chamber of Advocates, for its part, accused the PM of attacking the judiciary.

Abela was not only the leader of the Labour Party but also Malta’s prime minister, the chamber said.

“Therefore, he is obliged to weigh his words carefully without undermining the judiciary and its work. The judiciary should be left to work in liberty without interference,” the chamber said. 

“It was only the judiciary that can safeguard the rule of law and guarantees justice for all. It should not be criticised for political or partisan reasons.”