Two members of Malta’s Cabinet are actively cooperating with law enforcement agencies from two foreign countries on as yet unknown cases, a financial blogger has claimed.
“While we do not know the identifies of these two individuals, there aren’t a lot of choices, if you are looking to figure out who it is. Also, you can guess which is the other country. Just look at the prior vs the present travel plans of the players,” he wrote.
Riyock also provided some theories as to why the cabinet members could be cooperating in certain cases. Possible immunity from prosecution or pleading guilty to lesser charges is being floated.
Whoever these jurisdictions might be, they could have a bulletproof case on the issue, forcing the cabinet members’ hand. They could also be pre-empting any case that could be presented against accomplices.
It remains to be seen how this case will develop.
Riyock, who has reported extensively on the US’s case against Ali Sadr Hasheminejad, has turned his attentions to sealed documents being filed in the case. He says this could be an indication that Ali Sadr is providing US prosecutors with information.
Ali Sadr had been found guilty by jury but their decision was reversed after the prosecution dropped the case.
The sealed documents will only be revealed once the targets are in US custody. Riyock claims these could include Maltese officials that have committed breaches of US federal law on banking or that the US intends to charge for damaging the US financial system.
Eight high-profile targets are allegedly “current Cabinet-level officers of the Republic of Malta”.
Ali Sadr is the infamous Pilatus Bank owner with links to high-profile figures under former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat’s administration. It is linked to magisterial inquiries involving Muscat’s disgrace right-hand man Keith Schembri.
Assassinated journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia wrote extensively on the issue. Her claims that the mysterious Panama company Egrant was owned by Michelle Muscat and documents held at the bank would prove it were dismissed by an inquiry.
What do you make of the claims? Comment below