A Pattern of Obstruction, Secrecy and Deflection in Gibraltar

A troubling pattern of obstruction, secrecy and deflection in Gibraltar!

Gibraltar’s top financial watchdog has accused the Chief Minister of personally blocking an anti-money laundering audit at the state-owned Gibraltar Savings Bank,  just weeks before the territory was removed from the EU’s high-risk list.

Tony Sacramento, the recently retired Principal Auditor, made the allegations in his final official report, calling the intervention by Fabian Picardo “unacceptable, improper and unconstitutional”.

According to Europa Sur and GBC News, Sacramento had notified the Savings Bank’s interim director of his intention to carry out an audit under the Proceeds of Crime Act. Meetings were arranged. Yet before the audit could start, the Chief Minister reportedly summoned Sacramento and others to a meeting, declaring the audit would not go ahead.

The reason? A legal opinion, which was never shared with the Auditor, allegedly claiming he had no authority.

The government argued that an audit could undermine “public confidence” in the Savings Bank. Instead of transparency, it opted for silence. The audit never happened. No minutes were provided. No justification disclosed. No compliance officer was ever appointed.

But this is just one example.

The same 500-page report raises wider issues: unexplained ex-gratia payments, obstruction of auditors, politically connected contracts and, once again, the total absence of a Public Accounts Committee, the only UK Overseas Territory without one.

Sacramento, who served Gibraltar for nearly five decades, did not mince words. He warned of a “defensive attitude” across government departments, with key officials withholding documents and delaying oversight efforts.

Despite strong opposition support for a standing Public Accounts Committee, the GSLP/Liberals continue to reject it. The government even rewrote a 2023 motion in Parliament that would have established such a body, citing its “electoral mandate” instead.

Even as the Government insists it respects the Auditor’s role, it branded Sacramento’s report “flawed and biased”, accused him of political interference and implied he had strayed beyond his constitutional remit. No minister has faced public questioning. The Chief Minister is on holiday.

This is not an isolated case. It’s a systemic culture of avoiding scrutiny, one where constitutional checks are selectively respected, independent audits are blocked and questions around public funds are buried under procedure.

And yet, as GBC News notes, countries operating under the Westminster model all maintain Public Accounts Committees. So why not Gibraltar?

Why should any public official, regardless of political party, oppose independent oversight?

Why should a state bank lack even the minimum safeguards required under anti-money laundering law?

Why has legislation promised in the last manifesto, to strengthen the Auditor’s powers, still not been passed?

This is no longer about partisan politics. It’s about the very ability of institutions to hold those in power accountable.

If Gibraltar is to maintain its credibility as a transparent financial centre, ignoring these calls for reform is not just short-sighted, it is dangerous.

FAQs

What is the Gibraltar Savings Bank audit controversy about?
The controversy centers around accusations that Chief Minister Fabian Picardo blocked an anti-money laundering (AML) audit of the state-owned Gibraltar Savings Bank.

Who made the allegations against the Chief Minister?
Tony Sacramento, the recently retired Principal Auditor, made the allegations in his final report before leaving office.

What law was the proposed audit supposed to be conducted under?
The audit was to be conducted under the Proceeds of Crime Act, Gibraltar’s primary AML legislation.

Why was the audit blocked, according to reports?
The Chief Minister allegedly relied on a legal opinion, which was not shared with the Auditor, claiming Sacramento had no authority to conduct the audit.

What were the consequences of stopping the audit?
The audit was never conducted, no compliance officer was appointed, and no formal minutes or justification for halting the audit were disclosed.

Are there other issues raised in the Auditor’s report?
Yes. The report highlighted broader concerns including obstruction of auditors, unexplained payments, and the absence of a Public Accounts Committee.

Is Gibraltar unique in lacking a Public Accounts Committee?
Yes. Gibraltar is the only UK Overseas Territory that does not have a standing Public Accounts Committee for oversight.

How has the government responded to the report?
The government called the report “flawed and biased,” accused Sacramento of political interference, and rejected claims of overreach.

Why is this situation significant for Gibraltar’s reputation?
Blocking financial oversight could damage Gibraltar’s credibility as a transparent and compliant financial jurisdiction, especially after being removed from the EU’s high-risk list.

What reforms have been proposed?
Proposals include creating a Public Accounts Committee and strengthening the Auditor’s powers—though promised legislation has yet to be enacted.

Sources: Europa Sur (11 July 2025), GBC News (11 & 15 July 2025)