by Carlo Bonini
On the other hand, you called her a gossip-monger and you said that she reported stuff with no evidence?
Yes. I don’t think that I have a situation where because of her brutal assassination … I can just say that anything she wrote in her life was true and that I subscribed to that. You know in my case I reaffirmed the fact that what [she] wrote about me was totally false. I think I am entitled to do that.
Interview ends.
Prime minister Joseph Muscat denies any wrongdoing.
WHO KILLED DAPHNECARUANA GALIZIA?
The authors advise the reader to resist the temptation of starting this book by first reading this chapter. Do not board this train thinking it has reached its destination. Go back to the beginning and read it properly as you know you should.
At the start of this book, we described Malta as a dirty money locomotive hurtling through the night. On board, a cast of dodgy characters, with Daphne Caruana Galizia in the role of detective.
You can imagine our suspects on the train, Poirot twiddling his moustaches, every eye on the great detective. He coughs, revelling in the moment, then asks: ‘Who ordered the killing of Daphne Caruana Galizia?’
The camera pans on the faces of all present, smiling, impassive, neurotic, twitching. All concerned deny any wrongdoing.
Was it the Artful Dodger himself, Malta’s sleek, smooth-tongued yet blatantly dishonest prime minister, Joseph Muscat?
Or the woman who denies receiving a €1 million bung from the family of the fabulously corrupt President of Azerbaijan, who just so happens to be the prime minister’s wife?
Was it the prime minister’s consigliere, Keith Schembri, who had a shell company in Panama?
Or the only minister in the democratic world with a shell company in Panama who didn’t get sacked, Konrad Mizzi?
Or the third man who had a desk outside the prime minister’s office, accountant Brian Tonna?
Was it Yorgen Fenech, the casino boss whose Dubai shell company 17 Black was supposed to pay big money to Schembri and Mizzi? Remember Fenech’s casino, some years before the assassination, had handed €440,000 to one of the men accused of killing Daphne – evidence, one would have thought, of an unhealthy relationship?
Was it the brothel-creeper Chris Cardona?
Or his pal who laundered the dosh from the Soho brothel, Opposition Leader Adrian Delia?
Was it John Dalli, the man ‘let go’ by the European Commission five years to the dot before Daphne was murdered?
The dirty fuel king, Darren Debono?
Was it Ali Sadr, the litigious owner of Pilatus Bank, busted by the FBI and waiting for trial in the United States?
The people Ali Sadr banked for, the fabulously corrupt ‘royal family’ of Azerbaijan?
The Passport King?
His clients?
The Italian Mafia?
Or all of them together?
The screen goes black.
This isn’t fiction. This is not make-believe. This is real life and what really happened was that Malta’s brilliant detective was blown up in the most hideous way.
The authors stand aghast at the depth of corruption Daphne Caruana Galizia managed to unearth on her island home. We have turned over some stones and seen creatures wriggling away from the light but have elected not to tell everything we know for reasons we cannot, for the moment, explain.
There is fresh information about the men who have been charged with her execution. One of them is afraid of being poisoned, and is refusing prison food. He eats only what his family bring him and deliberately shares his food with other prisoners. All three men face spending the rest of their lives in prison. In Malta, life imprisonment means life. The pressure to reveal all must be strong. One day, perhaps, one of them might roll the dice and gamble on the fact that telling the world what he knows may be the least dangerous way out.
Perhaps.
What is certain is that the culture of impunity in Malta helped create the conditions in which its greatest and most fearless journalist could be murdered. But the dodgy characters listed above are not alone. The people of Malta, too, bear some responsibility for her murder. For too long they have turned a blind eye to the corruption of the government of Joseph Muscat. And if you ignore corruption for too long, you end up with innocent blood being spilt.
Casting the net still wider, across Europe and the western world those shifty politicians and PR smooth-sayers, rickety lawyers, bent coppers, dodgy bankers, and tricksy estate agents who look the other way when dirty money is flashed in their faces, bear some responsibility too.
Corruption stinks. We can all smell it. It is time that we did something about it.
For a new reader, Daphne’s blog is a thing of wonder. In between the shocking revelations, the scandals and the tightly-documented unveiling of wrongdoing, there is wisdom, anger, insight, humour, passion, contempt, frustration, sympathy, impatience, kindness, fury, and shock.
There are some things in her blog we would not have written. There is a lot more we wish we had. Her autonomy gave her the freedom to ask questions that news organisations would be afraid or unable to ask. It also allowed her to make her own mistakes. She owes no one an apology. The only journalists who make no mistakes are the ones who write nothing worth reading. Journalists must not be jellyfish.
As we read the work she wrote in the last months of her life, we see an air of melancholy creep in. She knew what she meant to her readers. Her Running Commentary was pretty much the only way they could understand what was happening to Malta. No one could explain it as well as she did. She knew that. She carried that burden with pride.
As we seek to understand the context in which she wrote, we share her frustration at the unanswered questions, the obfuscation, the double-speak.
Malta is part of the modern, open, globalised economy. But we can see that it is also being used by criminals for whom laws and national borders are trivial occupational hazards.
The people of Malta do not always acknowledge the victims of these crimes. They do not see the suffering caused by embezzlement and corruption in other countries; they do not see the blood on the floor left by smugglers, racketeers, extortionists, and drug traffickers.
Money-laundering is not a victimless crime. People suffer.
We worry for Malta, a home to one of the co-authors and a place the other two authors admire for its sad, threatened beauty.
Like Daphne, we worry that an oligarchy of interests — in politics, in business, in crime — has made Malta its private fiefdom. And the Maltese live in a country possessed by men, with some faces they recognise, others they do not because they know to stay hidden.
In this book, we write about Italian organised crime, the Russian state, Azerbaijani oligarchs, Iranian sanctions-dodgers, oil-smugglers, casino-operators, corrupt politicians, bent cops, and sleazy judges. They come from all over the world and use Malta as their backdoor to Europe; they use Malta as their clearing house, caring nothing for those they harm if they get in their way.
With time, we started to feel Daphne’s anger as if it was our own.
We wrote her story. But we also wrote the story of Malta.
Daphne deserves justice and this can only be had through the truth. Her husband, her sons, her parents, and her sisters deserve it too. We wish it for them.
But truth and justice for Daphne are truth and justice for Malta too. For as long as this train hurtles on, Daphne will not be the only victim.
In a dark hour, when many told Daphne they could see no hope, she wrote, ‘the fight against corruption and [against] the decimation of the rule of law must continue’.
Indeed, it must.
In Valletta, every night city cleaners remove flowers, photos, candles, and messages of support for Daphne’s family at the Great Siege Memorial in Valletta. In the morning, supporters and activists start again.
And the battle continues. As it must.
ALL CONCERNED DENY ANY WRONGDOING
The au
thors have attempted to present a fair account, including the points of view of people who might feel criticised by this book. We have, as far as practicable, included in our account, comments made by these persons and took pains to make sure that, wherever we are aware that this is indeed the case, we have made it abundantly clear that the persons concerned deny any wrongdoing.
In the cases of the following persons, we have informed them ahead of time of what we intended to publish and invited them to send us any response they wished us to include: Joseph Muscat, Michelle Muscat, Keith Schembri, Konrad Mizzi, Chris Cardona, John Dalli, Christian Kälin, Alexander Nix, attorneys for the directors of Pilatus Bank, Brian Tonna, Karl Cini, Stephan Roh in respect of himself and his client Joseph Mifsud, Adrian Delia, Anthony Axisa, attorneys for Darren Debono, Yorgen Fenech, and lawyers for Alfred Degiorgio, George Degiorgio, and Vincent Muscat.
We have not received responses by the time of publishing from all these persons. Here are the responses we have received. Any errors contained in the responses have not been corrected.
JOSEPH MUSCAT, MICHELLE MUSCAT, KEITH SCHEMBRI, KONRAD MIZZI AND CHRIS CARDONA
The authors put a series of questions to Malta’s prime minister, Joseph Muscat, his wife, Michelle Muscat, economy minister Chris Cardona, tourism minister Konrad Mizzi, and Keith Schrembi, the PM’s adviser. We received a letter from London law firm Carter-Ruck marked private and confidential. The authors are placed in a bind. If we print the Carter-Ruck letter, we breach their request for confidentiality. If we leave it out, it might appear that we have not offered Joseph Muscat, Michelle Muscat, Chris Cardona, Konrad Mizzi, and Keith Schrembi a right of reply which is not the case. Below, we set out the points made in Carter-Ruck’s letter.
Carter-Ruck says it is instructed by the government of Malta (‘the Government’) in connection with the authors’ communication on 2 September to the prime minister, his wife, and three government ministers [sic].
Carter-Ruck says that the authors have given no indication of the identity of the co-authors or the publishers of the proposed book. Carter-Ruck invites the authors to tell Carter-Ruck who the authors are.
Carter-Ruck says that although the authors say the book will be published in the ‘next few weeks’, and it must have been in development for some time, the authors have stipulated that a response will need to be given within a week of receipt of the authors’ email, by 9 September, after which time ‘the commitment to print deadline will have expired’. Carter-Ruck says that given the serious nature of the allegations that the authors raise, and the complexity of the background, this is an unreasonably short timeframe in which meaningfully to address the claims.
Carter-Ruck says that the authors will appreciate that, whilst the allegations put to each individual differ, each is highly defamatory. Carter-Ruck says that all of the matters put to the individuals in the authors’ correspondence are expressed, by implication, to be linked to the murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia as ‘the circumstances prior to and the aftermath of the assassination’ is said to be the overall subject of the book. Carter-Ruck says the individuals concerned reserve all their rights in relation to the publication and repetition of any allegation that is defamatory and untrue.
Carter-Ruck notes the authors’ assurance that the book takes into account the public comments, statements, and responses to criticism that the subjects of the allegations have made. Carter-Ruck says that its client (the government of Malta) would expect that, in so far as investigations have reached a conclusion, the public findings are reported faithfully and comprehensively, and that the public statements made on behalf of the government or individual ministers about these matters should be fairly reflected in any published book or other material.
Carter-Ruck understands that the matters the authors raise in the authors’ correspondence are either the subject of ongoing court proceedings or investigation in Malta, or have already been the subject of magisterial investigation. Carter-Ruck says the Egrant inquiry, for example, found signatures had been falsified on documents, inconsistent testimonies, and nothing linking the prime minister’s family to the offshore company.
Carter-Ruck says its client is engaging with the Council of Europe concerning the establishment of a public inquiry into Ms Caruana Galizia’s death, with a view to having a full and independent inquiry that will not interfere with ongoing criminal proceedings.
Carter-Ruck says, as the authors know, criminal proceedings are ongoing against three individuals charged in December 2017 in connection with Ms Galizia’s death and further investigations are being conducted by a magistrate in relation to potential involvement by other individuals. Carter-Ruck says its client has been clear that Ms Caruana Galizia’s death, and other allegations, should be investigated properly through the appropriate channels.
Carter-Ruck says yours faithfully, Carter-Ruck.
JOHN DALLI
John Dalli sent us an 84-page, 28,000-word monograph. This is our edited extract of his response.
Daphne Caruana Galizia directed an aggressive campaign of character assassination against me. I was called a crook and had to endure a whole litany of ad hominem insinuations. She joined forces with all those who, for one reason or another, had an axe to grind …
Caruana Galizia, in one of her articles, gives a good description of her mindset. It’s the sort of mind that resorts to crude stereotyping of other people. It is also obsessive and inflexible in its judgements. The article makes interesting reading and offers some fascinating psychological insights.
It will come as no surprise, therefore, that over the years Caruana Galizia invented all sorts of lurid fantasies about me. She placed me, strategically, in the middle of many untoward events – indeed anything that suited her own spurious narratives and vindictive agendas. She effectively demonised me. The comments under her articles, mostly written by organised psychos hidden behind nom de plumes …
I have endured fifteen years of vitriolic abuse from this warped and obsessive individual.
This spate of harassing blogs shows not only the obsessive mindset of Daphne Caruana Galizia but also her unceasing and malicious determination to destroy my reputation, my health, my peace of mind, my social existence, and my economic wellbeing …
On the smokeless tobacco scandal
Daphne Caruana Galizia continually referred to me as ‘the disgraced former European Commissioner’. This denigrating designation is copied by the poison pens in Malta who are still running a hate campaign against me. I am in all this the fall-guy: the victim of a set-up…
On his bank account at Pilatus
A bank account is a fact of life for most people. Our accounts and their confidentiality are protected by legislation. My own Pilatus account never showed any kind of suspicious transaction. I opened it with a €1000 deposit and closed it after the balance had been depleted by bank charges associated with the account’s inactivity. My reason for making this public statement is to counter the perception that I was one of the villains in Daphne Caruana Galizia’s Pilatus narrative.
On the Ponzi scheme allegations
I did not inform my EU colleagues that I was leaving Cyprus. And I had no need to inform them, let alone resort to a trumped-up excuse: I left simply because the meetings there had come to an end.
My reason for attending the Bahamas meeting was to learn about the possibility of a long-term solution to the refugee problem in the Mediterranean – a solution, I believed, that could only come about by creating viable domestic economies in the refugees’ own countries.
CHRISTIAN KÄLIN
The following was received from the Group Public Relations Director of Henley & Partners UK Ltd in response to our communication with Christian Kälin:
Thank you for your contact through the electronic portal. As Henley & Partners Group Director of Public Relations, please feel free to come to me direct should you need any further assistance from now on.
We appreciate your giving us the opportunity t
o provide input before you publish, and we will try to respond as fully as possible in order to prevent any misconceptions or even false statements.
We respect the efforts of serious and in-depth journalism, and it is in this spirit that we have welcomed the numerous media enquiries we have received on previous occasions, and responded to them in detail — even when we are often given very little time to reply because of the tight deadlines imposed by journalists and media houses.
As long as the media’s work remains factual, neutral, and balanced towards the reader, we believe it can truly make a difference, not only in helping correct general misconceptions but also hopefully in uncovering the truth behind the brutal murder of Daphne Caruana Galizia.
It is on this point that I wish to start. You have referred in a generalised and non-specific manner to multiple defamatory and factually incorrect allegations made about both Henley & Partners and its Chairman Dr Christian Kälin. We have – as you note and are well aware – refuted all of these in multiple public sources and made our position very clear in the past.
We have always been transparent with the global media; any suggestion of wrong-doing on our part, or even any reference to different facts in a misleading way (for example, failing to provide the proper context to an uninitiated reader not intimately familiar with the situation in Malta, or elsewhere). It is likely that such reporting will be defamatory.
We are sure you will understand that it is entirely wrong to report (undisputed) facts in a way that leaves the uninitiated reader with an impression of improper conduct on the part of particular persons or entities, let alone to make statements that are simply false.
It is unfortunate that despite our best efforts to provide clear and open answers to media enquiries, factually incorrect information is still quite frequently being (mis)reported.