Disgraced former prime minister Joseph Muscat has publicly withdrawn the unconditional loyalty he once offered his right-hand man Keith Schembri, declaring that he would now “stick his neck out” only for his wife and children.
The bold remark came during a press conference on Yorgen Fenech’s acquittal by the disgraced former PM, ‘to put the record straight’.
Asked by journalists whether he would still stick his neck out for Schembri, Muscat replied: “I stick my neck out only for my children and my wife.”
This was Muscat’s clearest public attempt yet to distance himself from the man who served as his chief of staff, closest political aide and gatekeeper at Castille between 2013 and 2019.
Yet, Muscat stopped short of repudiating Schembri.
During the same press conference, he defended him against several allegations that emerged during Fenech’s trial.
Contrary to evidence in Court, Muscat said he had never been aware of Schembri leaking information obtained through police briefings on the murder investigation. He maintained that Schembri neither requested nor insisted on attending those meetings and denied that either of them knew when arrests or searches would take place.
The disgraced former Labour leader also denied telling Schembri that presidential-pardon recipient Melvin Theuma had mentioned him. According to Muscat, Schembri’s name did not feature in the intercepted telephone conversations involving Theuma that were brought to his attention.
Muscat did not, however, explain how sensitive information reached Fenech. During the trial, Fenech testified that Schembri had shown him a copy of Theuma’s proposed presidential pardon before it was officially signed and had warned him that his telephone was being tapped. This was also confirmed by the police.
Schembri featured prominently throughout the trial despite not being accused in those proceedings. Fenech’s lawyers repeatedly shifted attention towards the former chief of staff, arguing that investigators had failed to pursue evidence that could have implicated him as the real mastermind.
According to Joseph Muscat, the family of the victim agrees that Schembri was not the mastermind.
The relationship between Muscat and Schembri long preceded their years at Castille.
Schembri helped Muscat transform the Labour Party after he became leader in 2008 and was a central strategist behind Labour’s landslide electoral victory in 2013.
Upon appointing him chief of staff, Muscat described his lifelong friend as the “best man” to introduce a new culture of delivery in government.
When the Panama Papers exposed Schembri’s offshore structure in 2016, Muscat resisted demands to dismiss him. He insisted that Schembri enjoyed his trust and complained that his chief of staff had been unfairly “demonised”.
In 2017, Muscat described their friendship as “nothing to be ashamed of”. When Schembri resigned in November 2019, amid the political crisis triggered by Fenech’s arrest, Muscat thanked him and said he had played a “crucial role” in government.
Even after leaving office, Muscat remained publicly loyal.
In 2021, he declared that he would never “ditch” his old friend.
During Muscat’s administration, Schembri was mentioned in all the sleazy deals and projects involving the government, from the fraudulent hospitals heist to a wind farm in Montenegro.
Sign up to our newsletter Stay in the know
"*" indicates required fields
Tags
#Joseph Muscat
#Keith Schembri
Jekk ma kienx ikun schembri fil meetings kien hemm il WIDNA TIEGHU VALLETTA U IL KUMM CUTAJAR.
SCHEMBRI DEJJEM QAL LI LIL MUSCAT KIEN JAJDLU KOLLOX.
While Labour apologists clutch at every straw to absolve their party of institutionalised corruption, some critics exercise a restraint that risks obscuring the gravity of what has already been established. The public inquiry found that the state bore responsibility for Daphne’s assassination through a culture of impunity originating at the highest levels of government. Yorgen Fenech’s acquittal does not overturn that finding, nor does it amount to an exoneration of the administration. Whatever the jury’s assessment of individual criminal responsibility, the evidence concerning political connections, confidential information and institutional interference raises profound questions about how public power was exercised and whom it served. In my view, the picture evokes the workings of a Mafia family: personal loyalty displacing public duty and institutions serving as instruments of protection. Now Muscat is doing everything to dissociate himself from an epic collage of corruption, deceit and lies, lest us not forget who was at the helm of our country, who refused public enquiries, who repeatedly defended the undefendable. “Żrar,” my ass. If democracy ran deeper than the ink on our Constitution, an oath of office would bind those who swear it, and its betrayal would demand an answer before the law. Instead, he enjoys a pension, premises at the public’s expense, and a platform from which to dress yesterday’s disgrace in tomorrow’s innocence.
Muscat’s position must be judged against that background. Having protected Schembri politically for years and pledged never to abandon him, he now declares that he would stick his neck out only for his wife and children, while continuing to defend his former chief of staff. That contradiction makes his distancing appear calculated for self-preservation. A newly qualified declaration of loyalty cannot extinguish responsibility for years of political protection.
Legal precision requires us to distinguish criminal guilt from political and institutional responsibility. It does not require us to minimise the latter whenever the former remains unproven. Moreover, if this country is ever to heal and recover from this ordeal those responsible need to face justice and receive a sentence that demonstrates to future generations that the powerful are not immune to justice.