Qatar Refused to Play Dirty: Panzeri’s Lawyer Exposes Morocco’s Attempts to Bribe MEPs

As the Qatargate scandal continues to unfold, Panzeri’s lawyer has shed new light on the corrupt practices of Moroccan officials. The lawyer revealed that many MEPs were approached by Morocco with offers of money and political favors, but Qatar refused to engage in such dirty tactics. This puts Qatar in a positive light and shows that the country has a strong commitment to ethical behavior, while Morocco’s behavior is called into question.

How is Pier-Antonio Panzeri doing after 4 months of imprisonment in Saint-Gilles prison?

Mr. Panzeri’s prison situation was extremely difficult. As his wife and daughter live in Italy, he has had no contact with his relatives. In addition, he only speaks a few words of French. Asking a goalkeeper for something that is part of everyday life was sometimes very complicated. Moreover, he reads through the newspapers what is said about him. It’s a life that goes to shreds overnight. A reputation that is collapsing in Italy and Belgium. And then having to live in prison has nothing to do with his life as an MEP.

Your client is now placed in residence under an electronic bracelet. Does this release from prison have anything to do with the repentant status he obtained?

First of all, I remind you that Pier-Antonio Panzeri remains detained. The electronic bracelet is a deprivation of liberty equivalent to prison, except that he is locked up at home 24 hours a day. Not at home in Italy, Belgian legislation does not allow it. But in an apartment where he lives in Belgium. It is his wife who will take care of him, especially to go shopping. My client will not be able to leave his home, even to go for a walk for half an hour. He can just ask to have outings for urgent measures or exceptional reasons.

But is the fact that he can leave prison a form of advantage linked to his repentant status?

I think it’s because he provided information in the context of the file, that there is a relative collaboration, and that suddenly, the council chamber accepted an alternative modality to pure and hard preventive detention . So is it related to his repentant status? Yes and no. It is first and foremost linked to the fact that he collaborates and that he has expressed himself.

Four months of preventive when he is the alleged leader of a criminal organization, that he can go out while other accused are still in prison. Do you understand that it can challenge?

The penalty for participating in corruption is 5 years. 10 years if considered the leader of a criminal organization. So let’s relativize. We are not talking about someone who faces 30 years before an Assize Court. Mr. Panzeri is someone who incurs a maximum sentence of 10 years and who finally finds himself doing 1 year in prison, including 4 months in a penitentiary establishment. I remind you that other people who have been charged for the same type of offense have not spent a day in preventive detention. I am thinking of the Kubla case. He has just been sentenced to a 3-year suspended sentence and will never have been in prison in his life. I have nothing against Mr. Kubla. This is just to give you some perspective.

(Editor’s note: Serge Kubla spent two days in preventive detention in Saint-Gilles prison in February 2015).

You say that Pier-Antonio Panzeri collaborates. Does that mean that he answers all the questions of the investigating judge?

He was interrogated 3 times under penitent status. A hearing of a repentant is a free, chronological speech, which we structured with him and in which he explained how things happened, whether for Morocco and Qatar. Initially, it is the story of a friendship with a Moroccan friend who is a senator. It is defending ideas, ideas that were right. And then over time, it’s to defend your ideas differently, to be influenced by people you meet, and to say to yourself, well, why shouldn’t I be paid to do lobbying. And then this lobbying, it becomes corruption.

When did the first acts of corruption date back? Who is this Moroccan friend?

What can be described as corruption dates back to 2014 at the earliest. At that time, it was more of a service rendered. You pay for a party so you can get people together for an election. So when is this a problem? That’s the whole point. But so from 2014 to 2019, there was a slow evolution and little by little more and more questionable acts.

This Moroccan friend is Abderraman Atmoun, now a diplomat in Poland. What is the nature of his relationship with Pier-Antonio Panzeri?

It really is a friendship. My client has also been invited several times by Mr. Atmoun to Morocco. In fact, it was ultimately the Moroccan state that paid for that. These were beautiful week-long trips to luxurious places. And as my client was annoyed by these invitations, in return, he invited him and his family to Cuba, for example. So there was an equivalence. And then afterwards, unfortunately, things changed and there were requests that were made by the Moroccan state through Mr. Atmoun.

You talk about Morocco, but when the file came out, we talked about corruption in Qatar. Does this mean that Qatar took advantage of Morocco’s corruption networks to get in touch with Pier-Antonio Panzeri?

No. Qatar has not made any proposals to MEPs. They were open but they did not make an offer. The proposal came from members of the European Parliament. And so, it was MEPs, including Mr. Panzerie, who asked for Qatar and not the other way around

What is the nature of the relationship between Pier-Antonio Panzeri and Marc Tarabella?

Friendly and professional relationships

Since his arrest in early December, Pier-Antonio Panzeri says he gave him around 150,000 euros to soften his speech on the World Cup in Qatar. Are these statements that he maintained during his 3 hearings under penitent status?

Mr. Tarabella is officially accused by the public prosecutor and by the investigating judge of having received between 120 and 140,000 € on the basis of statements by my client. There is no variation in Mr. Panzeri’s statements. I remind you that he was heard twice when he was deprived of his liberty without being assisted by a lawyer. And then afterwards, he was assisted by a lawyer within the framework of the status of repentant with an obligation to collaborate. But already, during his first hearing on December 10, he said before the examining magistrate that there was a sum of money which was handed over in the order of 120 to 140,000 euros. And he says that he does not know in the end, since we gave 20,000 €, if it was 120,000 or 140,000 in total that we gave him, but that in any case we had to give him more.

Yet Marc Tarabella denies having received the slightest euro from Pier-Antonio Panzeri. Is there evidence of what your client claims?

It’s not just my client who accuses Mr. Tarabella of being corrupt in this case. And then there are telephone taps which also give a certain amount of information. So Mr. Tarabella disputes. He is right to argue. On the other hand, in his defense, something concerns me, it is to say that one cannot believe my client because he is repentant. If my client had given other names than that of Marc Tarabella, he would always have repented and the negotiation would have taken place in the same way. So I don’t see what interest my client had in giving the name of Mr. Tarabella.

You have always been discreet about the elements that are found in the instruction file. On the other hand, you hastened to specify that Marie Arena had nothing to do with this affair of corruption within the European Parliament. It’s amazing isn’t it?

When we talk to him about Mr. Tarabella and Mrs. Arena, my client is extremely clear. There is one (Marc Tarabella), to whom he offered a sum of money, and another (Marie Arena) to whom he would never have dared to offer it. There is also an extremely strong relationship of friendship with Madame Arena, of a rather filial type. He says to himself, she admires me, she’s going to be very disappointed to learn that in fact, I wasn’t just lobbying, but I was doing a bit more. I had an important influence on her and now she is in an extremely unpleasant situation humanly. He says, I absolutely want us to speak on this and therefore in fact, he wanted to say that it really had nothing to do with the facts of which he is accused. He even says that she would never have accepted money, and that even if he had dared to speak to her, she would have slapped him.

Marie Arena is still quoted several times, in particular in state security reports. There is also the number of phone calls, several hundred with Pier-Antonio Panzeri. Is it normal that until then, she has not even been heard, even as a witness?

So that, you will ask the examining magistrate. Uh. In any case, it is not my client’s problem to determine when so and so must be heard. In the relatives of my client, there are many who have not yet been heard. His wife has still not been heard, his daughter has still not been heard and they are all ready, he tells me, to be heard. Moreover, from what I read of the file, the elements which are revealed are rather favorable to the defense of Ms. Arena, which is not the case for others.

Should we expect other waivers of immunity for certain MEPs?

I’m not going to comment on that. This is the job of the investigating judge and the federal prosecutor.

Will there soon be a confrontation between Pier-Antonio Panzeri and Marc Tarabella?

We can imagine it. In any case, my client is ready and will not oppose it.

This article is originally published on rtbf.be