Repubblika is publishing the preliminary decision it has received from the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life concerning the complaint it filed against Prime Minister Robert Abela following allegations made under oath by Judge Lawrence Mintoff.
The Commissioner explained that he will not publish this decision at this stage, but only, if appropriate, as part of the final report on those allegations that remain capable of investigation. Repubblika believes that the public has a right to know about this decision immediately. We are therefore publishing it in full.
The decision is confined to one issue: whether the Prime Minister could legally waive the statutory limitation period so that the Commissioner could also investigate allegations which, according to the law, had already fallen outside the prescribed time limits. These allegations concern conduct attributed by Judge Mintoff to Robert Abela when he was a Member of Parliament and practising as a lawyer.
The Commissioner has ruled unequivocally that it was not legally possible to disregard the statutory limitation period. The time limits established by law are matters of public order and cannot be set aside or waived by the person who is the subject of the investigation.
This conclusion confirms exactly what Repubblika said from the outset.
When the Prime Minister publicly announced that he was “waiving” the limitation period so that the Commissioner could investigate him, he was presenting the public with something that the law simply does not permit.
The Prime Minister knows perfectly well that a statutory limitation period cannot be removed by his consent. The courts cannot disregard it. Nor could the Commissioner.
The only effect of the Prime Minister’s purported waiver, therefore, was political: to create the impression that he had no objection to a full investigation, while knowing that the law would in any event prevent it.
This was a display of contempt for the public and for the process itself.
More seriously still, this is not a problem that the Government has only just discovered. The law that prevents these investigations was enacted by the same parliamentary majority that supports the Prime Minister today. For years, the necessary reforms have not been undertaken, despite the fact that the shortcomings of the law have long been recognised and have been the subject of recommendations from various quarters, including the Commissioner for Standards and the OECD.
The Prime Minister is not merely in a position to complain that the law is unsatisfactory. He has the political and parliamentary authority to change it. Instead, he sought to create the impression that he was prepared to disregard a law which he knows perfectly well no one has the power to disregard.
Although the law as it currently stands means that allegations falling outside the limitation period cannot be investigated, the manner in which the Prime Minister sought to exploit this legal limitation in order to project an image of transparency raises further serious questions about his conduct in office.
Repubblika expects the Commissioner to proceed without delay with the investigation of all those allegations that remain capable of investigation under the law.
At the same time, Repubblika once again calls on the Government to amend the Standards in Public Life Act without delay so that the limitation period can no longer be used as a barrier to the investigation of serious allegations concerning the conduct of holders of public office.
8 July 2026