Robert Abela Says He Was Mistaken To Claim Daphne Caruana’s Sons Want To Hinder Murder Case
Prime Minister Robert Abela has said he was “mistaken” to suggest Daphne Caruana Galizia’s sons wanted to hinder the investigations into their mother’s assassination.
“I was mistaken and I retract that comment,” he said, when asked by Lovin Malta whether he stands by his statement, which he passed on Facebook in September 2018.
Abela, who was back then an MP and legal advisor to then Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, had derided Daphne Caruana Galizia’s sons for seeking the advice of British law firms to remove deputy police commissioner Silvio Valletta from the murder case.
“It would have been better had the law firms spoken about the mission of the Caruana Galizia children to hinder the investigations. Instead, they have the gall to say that the government is being hostile towards [the sons],” he had said.
Valletta was eventually forced off the case after a constitutional court ruled he had a potential conflict of interest due to his marriage to former Gozo minister Justyne Caruana.
It was later revealed that Valletta enjoyed a close relationship with murder suspect Yorgen Fenech, which prompted Abela to remove Caruana as minister.
Abela today said he wants to see full justice done as expediently as possible and said the government will commit any resources needed by the institutions towards this end.
“I believe in our institutions and that they should be allowed to work as freely as possible,” Abela said, before firing a warning at lawyers involved in the case.
“The judicial process isn’t a chess game and those who are truly convinced in the courts and the rule of law should allow them to work freely,” he said. “This includes lawyers, whose job isn’t to score political goals but to conduct research to find the truth.”
“I definitely won’t interfere in the work of our institutions and I’ll give them resources if they need them to ensure the judicial process takes its natural course, which means it shouldn’t be delayed unnecessarily.”
“I want the court to take decisions, but I won’t comment on what these decisions should be or I will prejudice the case. In the same way, I won’t fall into the trap of holding a parliamentary debate on this topic because I know people can escape justice on a technical point.”