The Criminal Court has cleared the way for one of Malta’s most high-profile financial crime cases to move forward, rejecting all preliminary objections raised by former OPM chief of staff Keith Schembri and several associates.Schembri, alongside his father Alfio Schembri, business partner Malcolm Scerri and Kasco Group financial controller Robert Zammit, is facing a wide-ranging money laundering case involving multiple companies linked to the Kasco Group as reported by MaltaToday.The court, presided over by Giovanni M. Grixti, dismissed every objection brought forward by the defence, confirming that the case will proceed to trial.The proceedings centre on alleged financial crimes committed between 2005 and 2019 in Malta and abroad. A 13-count indictment includes accusations of money laundering, fraud, criminal association, and the use of false accounting records and invoices to conceal illicit activity and generate unlawful gains exceeding €5,000.Prosecutors also allege that false declarations and backdated invoices were submitted to public entities, including the Customs Department, Malta Enterprise and Bank of Valletta. Additional charges relate to tax offences, including undeclared income and misleading information provided to tax authorities.Separate corruption-related allegations claim that Schembri and Scerri were involved in improper dealings connected to media organisations such as Allied Newspapers Limited and Progress Press Company Limited, including the offering of benefits to individuals in influential positions.Schembri also faces accusations of perjury linked to testimony given during magisterial inquiry proceedings, alongside further allegations involving falsified documents and forged records. One charge is exclusively directed at Zammit, who is accused of professional misconduct in his role as an accountant or auditor.All accused have pleaded not guilty.Before the case could proceed, the defence raised a number of preliminary objections, focusing heavily on the issue of prescription, arguing that some of the alleged offences should be considered time-barred due to the passage of time.However, the court rejected this argument, ruling that prescription does not begin simply when authorities have early suspicions, but when they are in a position to reasonably identify both the offence and the individuals involved. After examining each charge, the court concluded that none were time-barred.Further objections targeting the validity of the indictment and the admissibility of evidence, including FIAU reports, expert analyses and witness testimony, were also dismissed. The court held that such evidence is prima facie admissible at this stage, with questions of reliability and credibility to be determined during the trial itself.Objections regarding witness competence and hearsay were likewise rejected.In its final ruling on the matter, the court dismissed all eight preliminary objections, effectively removing the last procedural hurdles and allowing the case to proceed.The Criminal Court was presided over by Judge Giovanni M Grixti.•