Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1007543
maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 25 JULY 2018 6 JAMES DEBONO SIMON Busuttil's endorsement of the Egrant allegation that Egrant, the third and unaccounted for Panama company be- longed to the PM's wife may well go down as one of the greatest errors of judgement in recent Maltese history. This political misjudgement has now boomeranged not just on the Nationalist Party but also on those who are still asking legitimate questions on the institutional paralysis after Panamagate. PN leader Simon Busuttil rushed to en- dorse journalist Caruana Galizia's rev- elation that Egrant belonged to Michelle Muscat by immediately calling for a na- tional demonstration against corruption in which thousands of people participated. Yet when confronting the PM on Xara- bank two days before taking to the streets the same Busuttil had distanced himself from Caruana Galizia's claims insisting that "whether Egrant is his or his wife's has almost become a secondary matter" in view of the various ramifications of Pan- amagate. This contradiction sums it all. Instead of harping on Muscat's failure to sack Keith Schembri and Konrad Mizzi for open- ing secretive Panama companies, Busuttil could not resist the temptation of raising the stakes by latching on allegations which he could not convincingly endorse and de- fend through the electoral campaign. PN supporters were left right to the end wondering when the ultimate proof would descend from Caruana Galizia's cloud. Bu- suttil's approach suggests that he was will- ing to make a leap of faith based on what was reported on Caruana Galizia's blog. His initial argument was that Muscat could not remain a Prime Minister who is under investigation. The PM was quick to turn the tables, promising to resign if he was found in the wrong and inviting Bu- suttil to do likewise if the allegation he had endorsed was debunked. Busuttil refused to take the challenge and looked weak. Once Muscat called for an election, Bu- suttil became more blunt in endorsing Caruana Galizia's claims with his hopes hinging on the electorate making the same leap of faith as he did. All this may reflect desperation at polls showing Muscat consolidating his trust lead despite the Panama shocker. Things got worse after revelations that the party was receiving donations from the db group, something which further under- mined the PN's good governance creden- tials. In short things were not looking good for the PN before the Egrant allegations surfaced. Egrant and scenes of the Pilatus bank chairman leaving the bank carrying luggage, served to re-ignite popular anger originally triggered by Panamagate. Yet Busuttil lacked the conviction to carry the message through. His weak per- formance when confronting the Prime Minister directly on this issue during the Xarabank debate on 21 April set the tone for the electoral campaign called by the PM on May 1. It was an election where the ownership of Egrant and not impunity after Panamagate was the main issue. Busuttil also put him- self in the difficult position of someone at- tacking the PM's family, something which was bound to backfire in a society where defence of the family's honour is a defining characteristic. Did Busuttil have another option? Today some would argue that as Opposi- tion leader Busuttil was duty-bound to call for an investigation of the Egrant allega- tion. Yet Busuttil had another option – that of giving the PM the benefit of the doubt on Egrant's ownership, while pledging to respect the outcome of the magisterial in- quiry. Instead of rushing where angels fear to thread he could have pressed a strong political point; if the PM is so recoiled by the notion of his wife owning a company in Panama, why did he retain Konrad Miz- zi in his cabinet and Keith Schembri as his chief of staff? Probably this might not have been enough to win him an improbable election victory but would have resonated with the sentiment of a considerable part of the population. At least it would have left the Opposition in good shape to face a second Muscat ad- ministration without being left at the mer- cy of the outcome of a magisterial inquiry whose conclusions are now devastating for the Opposition. While throughout the campaign Busut- til constantly tried to put the focus again on Panamagate by initiating investiga- tions on its protagonists by presenting new evidence to magistrate Bugeja which triggered still pending magisterial inquir- ies, the public remained mostly interested in what appeared to be the cherry on the cake, the accusation that Muscat's wife was the owner of the third secret compa- ny, Egrant, opened by Nexia BT after the 2013 general election. Even his attitude towards the investiga- tion wavered from an initial description of the inquiry called by the PM as a "cover up" (in the context of the delay between the revelations on Caruana Galizia's blog and the call for the inquiry) and his sub- sequent declarations that he had full trust in the enquiry and his pledge to respect its outcome. A boomerang on civil society The same dynamics which obscured Panamagate during the electoral cam- paign have now inevitably boomeranged not just Busuttil but all those demanding justice on Panamagate and other cases of impropriety like the privatisation of hospi- tals to Vitals and the Sadeen land grab. The risk is that the consequence of all this is that even legitimate criticism of the government's handling of Panamagate and its failure to act on FIAU report on Pilatus Bank and 17 Black can be shot down easily as a repetition of Egrant. But this may be a valuable lesson not to believe everything that fits within a par- ticular narrative. Egrant is a cautionary tale on how the two-party system can distort legitimate civil society concerns towards partisan gain. For the Egrant narrative was based on linking dots based on plausible conjec- tures ranging from Azeri caviar diplomacy to the existence of the mysterious third Panama company to give credence to the claim that Michelle Muscat is the benefi- cial owner of Egrant. The risk is that this narrative will now cast doubts on the various shreds of evi- dence assembled in a mismatched puzzle. This may be the case since Muscat's re- luctance to act decisively by removing Mizzi and Schembri which fed and gave NEWS ANALYSIS From Panama outrage to Egrant The conclusions of the Egrant inquiry have exposed how misguided Simon Busuttil was in endorsing an unverified allegation which fed on legitimate outrage at Joseph Muscat's failure to bring closure to Panamagate. But it also exposes the limits of the two-party system in which impunity was entrenched by one side while the other side was constantly raising the stakes to inf lict maximum damage on the adversary with little regards for the truth Simon Busuttil on Egrant 21 April 2017 After Daphne Caruana Galizia publishes a transcript of the alleged Egrant documents Busuttil tells Peppi Azzopardi he can't comment on documents he's barely seen, adding : "Whether Egrant is his or his wife's has almost become a secondary matter." 23 April 2017 Addressing an anti-corruption demonstration Busuttil says: "We have a commissioner who refused to seal the bank, choosing instead to go to a fenkata. The PM has now appointed a sham inquiry, and he expects us to provide the proof. Prime Minister, this is why the proof is in your behaviour." 24 April 2017 "If the magistrate asks her (Caruana Galizia) to appear in front of him, then she should comply as should everyone with evidence," he said in response to a question by MaltaToday at a press conference after Caruana Galizia had initially expressed her reluctance on taking part in the inquiry. 19 May 2017 In reply to questions by the press during the electoral campaign Busuttil is very categorical: "I have no doubt that Egrant belongs to Prime Minister Joseph Muscat." 26 May 2017 In a press conference during which he criticised Muscat for putting pressure on magistrate Aaron Bugeja he said: "I will respect the magistrate's decision and won't try to influence him, and I can promise you that a PN government will bring normality and serenity back to this country." 26 May 2017 In final Xarabank debate Busuttil says: "We're going for an election and Joseph Muscat is under an investigation. And it's obvious that the magistrate will confirm it because there is a whistleblower and an FIAU report that [supports] what she said. Why didn't he wait? He could have waited it out and called an election as a winner. You, Dr Muscat, are scared of the inquiry."