Former Sliema mayor’s auditor warrant under scrutiny after corruption conviction

Former Sliema mayor Nikki Dimech’s professional future has been thrown into doubt after the Court of Criminal Appeal overturned part of his acquittal and found him guilty of corruption, raising immediate questions over whether Malta’s Accountancy Board, headed by Edgar Borg, will allow him to continue practising as a warranted auditor.

Dimech, who remains listed in the Accountancy Board’s public register as a Certified Public Accountant and holder of a practising certificate in auditing, now faces the prospect of disciplinary scrutiny by the profession’s regulator following the judgment.

The Criminal Court of Appeal, presided over by Madam Justice Natasha Galea Sciberras, partially upheld an appeal by the Attorney General against Dimech’s complete acquittal by the Court of Magistrates in 2023.

While confirming several acquittals, the court found him guilty of corruption in relation to payments received from Sliema Local Council contractor Joseph Vella of Velljo Services while serving as mayor.

The conviction revives one of Malta’s most notorious local government corruption cases and places Dimech’s professional standing firmly in the spotlight.

Under the Accountancy Profession Act, warrant holders are expected to satisfy the requirement of being persons of good conduct and repute. The Accountancy Board has the power to investigate disciplinary matters and, where warranted, suspend or revoke a practising certificate or recommend the withdrawal of a CPA warrant.

Although any regulatory process would be separate from the criminal proceedings, the corruption conviction is likely to place Dimech’s continued eligibility to practise under scrutiny.

In its judgment, the Court concluded that the evidence relating to the payments made by Velljo Services established the constituent elements of corruption. It rejected the explanations advanced by the defence and accepted that the payments were linked to Dimech’s public office, overturning the lower court’s acquittal on that charge.

At the same time, the Court upheld several of Dimech’s acquittals, agreeing that the prosecution had failed to prove other allegations involving different contractors and transactions because of evidential shortcomings.

The latest judgment also vindicates the pre-2013 Nationalist Party’s administration to immediately distance itself from Dimech at the outset of the scandal.

In August 2010, after Dimech admitted during police questioning that he had asked a council contractor for a commission, the PN, through its secretary general, Paul Borg Olivier, demanded his resignation as mayor and expelled him from the party when he refused to step down.

At the time, Dimech insisted he had been abandoned before the courts had determined his guilt, and the party faced criticism for acting too quickly.

Sixteen years later, the Court of Criminal Appeal’s ruling lends considerable weight to the PN leadership’s position that Dimech’s conduct had rendered him unfit to continue representing the party. Although not every charge was upheld, the court concluded that he had committed corruption while occupying an elected public office.