Recently, the Qatargate scandal has taken a new turn with the late guarantee from the prosecutor’s office. Now, it asserts Eva Kaili’s defense of immunity. Former vice president of the European Parliament finds herself in the midst of controversy.
Belgian magistrates are opposing the information leaks. Those leaks initially fueled the investigation. Further, transformed it into Europe’s largest corruption scandal. However, they now also argue that revoking guarantees is unnecessary.
In reaction to recent misleading statements in the media, the prosecutor’s office has come to clarify. The Federal Prosecutor’s Office emphasizes the need for justice to proceed calmly. The prosecutor acknowledges the ongoing leaks. They also express disapproval. Further, they stress that these leaks should not disclose investigative strategies. Moreover, they emphasize that the investigation is going through a confidential phase of the inquiry.
The Belgian federal prosecutor differs from the procedure of the resigning judge Michel Claise. They stated that no immunity waiver is required to investigate Maria Arena. The leading player in the investigation is a Belgian socialist MEP. This stance also raises questions about double standards. If we compare this to the case of Marc Tarabella, he was implicated without evidence.
The prosecutor mentions leaks in recent days. They include revelations about Arena’s involvement. These details were not available to the public. But made public a year later, raising suspicions about potential political protection. Antonio Panzeri, who is also a key suspect, initially implicated Arena but later acquitted her. It led to complicating the narrative.
The controversy deepens with reports of investigations at Arena’s residence and her son’s house. Investigators uncovered cash, hashish, and possible connections to the Qatargate scandal. Despite these findings, the federal prosecutor argues against the immediate revocation of Arena’s parliamentary immunity. They also cite the available investigative means.
The case draws similarities with former vice president Eva Kaili. She faced arrest without being a subject of investigation until the day of her arrest. Additionally, Leaks violated the investigation’s confidentiality by revealing it to the press. It led to widespread knowledge of details even before suspects were informed.
Eva Kaili’s lawyer commented on the unprecedented breaches of confidentiality. It led to an investigation by the federal prosecutor. The leak of information mainly affected Italy. Newspapers published documents and wiretaps. This information revealed the network of individuals involved in the scandal. The press’s earlier access to details raises questions about the source of leaked information. Even before the suspects were informed, the information was in the newspaper, which caused severe controversy.
As the scandal unfolds and more information comes, there is a shift in public narrative and media opinion. The public is skeptical and questioning the basis of the investigation, and the credibility of the Belgian judiciary is reaching a new low.
