The Attorney General and lawyers representing high ranking officials have raised objections after the presentation of documents by former PN leader Simon Busuttil’s legal team in the constitutional case calling for a judge’s recusal.
Busuttil has called on Mr Justice Antonio Mizzi to refrain from hearing an appeal, filed by the PM and six others, who are challenging a ruling by Magistrate Ian Farrugia that there are grounds for launching an inquiry into the Panama Papers revelations. Busuttil says Mizzi should not preside over the appeal because he is married to Labour MEP Marlene Mizzi. That request was rejected by Mr Justice Mizzi, prompting Busuttil to take the matter up to the Constitutional Court.
On Friday, Simon Busuttil’s lawyer, Jason Azzopardi, presented several documents to the court, including official transcripts of Busuttil’s submissions before Mr Justice Mizzi last August, a legal copy of the decrees presented by Magistrate Aaron Bugeja and both of Busuttil’s applications to the court which led to the launching of two separate inquiries.
The AG objected to this on the basis of relevance.
In addition, Professor Ian Refalo, a lawyer representing former Allied Newspapers managing director Adrian Hillman, objected to Azzopardi’s presentation of a media report on a speech delivered by Mr Justice Mizzi’s wife, PL MEP Marlene Mizzi, claiming it was a report of what she said and not what she actually said.
Adrian Hillman was named in the Panama Papers revelations where it was revealed that he held an offshore company.
In addition, several lawyers complained about not being notified that the notes were filed by Azzopardi last Friday.
Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon, presiding over the constitutional court, ordered that the lawyers be notified, while a court messenger took it upon himself to serve the lawyers with the presented notes.
The case continues 13 February.
Background
In July 2017 an application was filed by Busuttil before the on-duty magistrate Ian Farrugia, regarding the Panama Papers and high-ranking government officials such as Minister Konrad Mizzi and the PM’s chief of staff Keith Schembri. Farrugia had decreed that the pre-requisites for an investigation were met and called for a magisterial inquiry to be launched.
After the magistrate's decision to open an inquiry into, among other things, whether money-laundering laws had been breached by high-ranking members of government when they opened Panamanian companies and New Zealand trusts, the seven individuals that the inquiry application had mentioned (Prime Minister Joseph Muscat, his chief of staff Keith Schembri and Tourism Minister Konrad Mizzi, as well as Brian Tonna, Karl Cini, Malcolm Scerri and Adrian Hillman ) filed an application for Magistrate Ian Farrugia's decision be revoked.
It must be stated that the PM was not personally named in the Panama Papers revelations.
The appeal was being heard before Mr Justice Antonio Mizzi, husband of PL MEP Marlene Mizzi.
In view of this, former PN leader Simon Busuttil filed a request for Mr Justice Mizzi to recuse himself on the basis that justice must not only be done, but it must be seen to be done.
Mr Justice Mizzi ultimately turned down the request for recusal, prompting Busuttil to file a Constitutional application to overturn the decision, being heard before Mr Justice Joseph Zammit McKeon.
Pending the outcome of McKeon’s decision on whether Mizzi should recuse himself, the proceedings on Mizzi’s decision on whether Farrugia’s decision to investigate Panama Papers should be overturned is currently suspended.