Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1380662
15 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 6 JUNE 2021 NEWS asked directly by MaltaToday whether he will be suing the Degorgios for libel over their allegation to Reynders. And this prompted renewed calls by Oppo- sition leader Bernard Grech for Abela's suspension from the Cabinet until his name is cleared. But in a game of high stakes, which comes with very real and painful reputational damage for Carmelo Abela, Robert Abela is in a real quandary. The PM's elusive yardstick So far the Prime Minister 's line of thought in this case was to question the credibility of the accusers, expressing bewilderment at how people accused of complicity in assassinating Caruana Galizia are now being given credibility. But significantly while hitting back at the Opposition, which he accuses of a "coordinated strategy" with "criminals", he added that he would not hesitate to take action if "any credible proof were to emerge". Such reasoning seems to contrast with the yardstick set in other cases. Konrad Mizzi was kicked out of the party after media stories linking him to the Mon- tenegro scandal, even if he is yet to be charged with corruption or money laun- dering in a court of law. Junior Minister Rosianne Cutajar also announced her resignation pending an investigation by the Standards Commissioner on her alleged involvement in a property deal with Yorgen Fenech. Comparisons are indeed odious. In the case of Mizzi, his overdue expulsion was motivated by the factual reality of the Panama companies and its links to secret companies owned by Yorgen Fenech and Cheng Chen. In this sense Robert Abela's decision on Mizzi was a political move to remove a millstone from around his neck. On the other hand Rosianne Cuta- jar's auto-suspension from Cabinet came in the wake of court litigation and media reports. One problem for Abela is that while in Cutajar's case her fate depends on the outcome of an investigation by the Standards Commissioner, in Carmelo Abela's case the PM links his fate to ab- sence of "credible proof" linking him to the bank heist. The other problem is that there is no judicial or administrative pro- cess with a clear outcome and timeframe, which can definitively clear Carmelo Ab- ela's name and the dark cloud hanging on the entire Cabinet. What the PM can say at this stage is that so far the police have not found any evidence linking Carmelo Abe- la to the bank heist. Yet this rais- es another question: what if the information provided by the Degorgios' is the only way to establish this link for the police to corroborate or refuse after a pardon is granted? And yet, even here the PM sits on a minefield; for how can he even consider a pardon for the executors of the Carua- na Galizia murder, something to which her family firmly ob- jects? Matthew Caruana Gal- izia's own reaction to the De- gorgios' letter to the European Commission was another explo- sive claim that the Degorgios' le- gal expenses are being paid by al- leged mastermind Yorgen Fenech – at least, as stated in court by the assassination middle- man Melvin Theuma, who sought to p a y the brothers' lawyers' fees by getting the cash from Fenech. Is the Opposition raising the stakes again? For the PN this high-stakes game could always backfire badly if Abela's name is cleared or if he even wins the battle for people's hearts. While there is validity in the argument that Abela should be sus- pended until his name is cleared, there is also validity in the argument that no government should put itself in a posi- tion where alleged assassins can hold it at ransom. It is a situation that could create a prec- edent for any minister, politician or pub- lic person facing the wildest accusations in bids by criminals to obtain pardons or reduced sentences, or simply to cre- ate hubris. Let's not forget that in coun- tries like Italy, while pentiti had a crucial role in apprehending mafia bosses, fake allegations by some of them also led to massive injustices like that faced by TV presenter Enzo Tortora. Former PM Gi- ulio Andreotti's conviction for ordering the execution of journalist Mino Pecorel- li was itself based on testimony by ma- fia turncoat Tommaso Buscetta. But the conviction was later overturned. Is Carmelo Abela his own worst enemy? Surely over the past months Carme- lo Abela has not helped himself by first ignoring the accusations when his name was not directly mentioned but clearly hinted at, and then showing signs of con- fusion, especially when claiming to have forgotten testifying before the courts over his possible links to the failed 2010 heist. This inevitably raised the question: how could have Abela forgotten such an important detail? Still for a moment one should consid- er how an innocent person faced such a grave accusation would feel and react. While we are forced to entertain the possibility that Abela could be as guilty as sin, which would have tragic conse- quences for his party and public trust in the institutions, one should also enter- tain a scenario where an innocent per- son ended up on the receiving end of a calumny. It is here where the Opposition has to be careful. While one cannot vouch for anyone, especially after all that has been revealed in the past two years in which prominent businessmen like Yorgen Fenech were accused of murder and former chief of staff Keith Schembri is now facing mon- ey laundering charges, one should still wary to rush to conclusions. The Opposition was already bad- ly bruised when it jumped the gun on Egrant instead of focus- ing on scandals where it had a more solid case. Clearing the air The only way out of the quan- dary is for the police to con- clude its investigations on the bank heist and any possible inside job involving bank employees. The ideal scenario would be one where both government and oppo- sition trust the police commissioner's judgement on whether the Degorgios' claims have any credibility or not. This may be the only reasonable way forward, with Carmelo Abela possibly taking a step back himself until the con- clusion of the recently reopened police investigation of the heist. Yet the para- dox remains: if Abela is guilty his persis- tence in remaining in the Cabinet would not just be sinister but an affront to any semblance of institutional respect. This in itself raises the suspicion that there is too much at stake for Robert Abela in even entertaining the possibility of Carmelo Abela's guilt especially a few months before a general election. For even a suspicion may be interpreted as a partial admission of guilt. Moreover if Carmelo Abela resigns de- spite being innocent, he would have given in to the blackmail of a gang of criminals. It may even spell the end of his political career, especially if investigations drag on for years. But if innocent, at this stage it remains doubtful whether Abela can fully exercise his duties as a minister in a serene way. Anyone meeting him in his official capacity as minister cannot avoid entertaining the thought that he might be consorting with an accomplice of a bank heist. A paradox with no easy solution This is why the issue remains tricky and has no easy solution: the paradox was fur- ther compounded when in court, proce- dures on the libel suit instituted against Jason Azzopardi saw the presiding mag- istrate telling Carmelo Abela that it fell upon him to prove whether Azzopardi's allegations are true or not. In an inver- sion of the burden of proof on statements of fact, the magistrate accepted that Az- zopardi's claims on Facebook were fair comment and that it should be Abela to disprove it. So if Abela had nothing to do with the case, how exactly is he expected to prove his innocence? And then again... why does he not file a libel against the Degor- gio brothers in a bid to call their bluff? Ultimately if Abela is guilty of complic- ity in a bank heist as alleged by the De- giorgio brothers, his persistence in the Cabinet would go in history as the great- est affront to democratic institutions. If innocent of this heinous crime, enter- taining the thought that he is guilty is itself a grave injustice to Carmelo Abela and the institutions he serves. Ultimately it is Robert Abela who must weigh the scales in deliberating between the risk, however small, of harbouring a criminal in his Cabinet and that of giving in to criminals and punishing an inno- cent man. jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt