Health Ministry funds firm accused of money laundering

Malta’s Health Ministry has maintained its professional relationship with Ennesse Ltd—a private accountancy firm owned by Nigel and Mikaela Scerri—even though both proprietors are currently facing significant money laundering charges. The ongoing collaboration, despite a court-ordered freeze on the firm's assets, has triggered widespread public concern regarding the government's commitment to transparency and financial accountability.

Records obtained via a Freedom of Information (FOI) request show that the firm is receiving more than €20,000 per month for “accounts and payroll duties” at Mount Carmel Hospital, Malta’s main psychiatric institution. These payments have continued uninterrupted for years through direct orders, which bypass competitive public procurement procedures — a practice that contradicts good governance principles and potentially violates procurement regulations.

Half a million euros paid amid criminal scrutiny

The Shift’s investigation into the FOI documents revealed that between June 2022 and March 2025, Ennesse Ltd was paid over €500,000 in monthly installments. Payments surged from €9,585 in June 2022 to €22,335 in February 2025 — a more than twofold increase within less than three years.

This sharp rise in compensation, especially in the context of identical services being rendered, has raised red flags, with no official explanation provided by the Health Ministry for this cost inflation.

The case gains further complexity given that Ennesse Ltd, despite being embroiled in ongoing legal proceedings, was reportedly also awarded direct orders to provide similar services to Mater Dei Hospital, Malta’s largest public health facility. However, Health Minister Jo Etienne Abela later issued a public clarification stating that the contract listing in the Government Gazette was a mistake and that Ennesse Ltd is currently only engaged at Mount Carmel Hospital.

Government claims new tender is pending

Minister Abela confirmed that the Ministry is still utilising Ennesse Ltd’s services for Mount Carmel’s payroll and accounting functions, citing the lack of an active tender as the reason. He explained that a new tendering process is being prepared but has remained on hold since May 2022, coinciding with the start of direct payments to Ennesse Ltd.

While the government acknowledges the controversial nature of the arrangement, it has not provided a clear timeline for when the tender will be published or awarded, raising questions about whether proper safeguards are being followed in light of the firm's criminal implications.

Former CEO linked to broader Health Ministry scandal

When the direct orders were first implemented, Mount Carmel Hospital was under the leadership of CEO Stephanie Xuereb. Her tenure was marked by other controversies, including an internal investigation into widespread overtime abuse by Paul Pace, the President of the Malta Union of Midwives and Nurses (MUMN).

Though incriminating evidence was reportedly uncovered by a Health Ministry board, no court proceedings have yet been initiated against Pace. Xuereb was eventually replaced by Roseanne Camilleri. The replacement came without public explanation but is widely believed to be linked to the brewing scandal surrounding operational mismanagement and financial irregularities.

Owners of Ennesse Ltd charged in €1.5 million laundering case

The owners of Ennesse Ltd — Nigel and Mikaela Scerri — are both facing criminal charges of money laundering and financial misconduct, alongside several companies they own. The court case was initiated after Malta’s tax authorities raised red flags about the couple’s lavish lifestyle, which seemed incongruent with their declared income.

Investigators revealed that from 2016 to 2024, the Scerri couple amassed property assets in Malta valued at over €12 million. They also managed 26 bank accounts, including some offshore, raising alarms about potential tax evasion and illegal financial activities.

One notable transaction that drew scrutiny was a €1 million real estate loan that was fully repaid in under a year — an unusually rapid repayment that raised questions about the origin of the funds. Authorities suspect that the couple may have used illicit funds to cover the repayment, a tactic often associated with money laundering practices.

Failed philanthropic venture further clouds reputation

In 2023, Nigel Scerri attempted to rebrand his public image by offering prime real estate in Sliema to the Soup Kitchen Foundation, a non-profit organisation providing support for disadvantaged individuals. The proposal aimed to develop a social housing project for abandoned youths, which initially received some praise from civil society actors.

However, the project was abandoned shortly thereafter following strong opposition from local residents, who raised concerns about the impact on the neighbourhood and questioned Scerri’s motivations given his legal circumstances. Critics labelled the move as a publicity stunt aimed at garnering sympathy ahead of impending legal action.

Corporate fallout and resignation from DIZZ Group

In the wake of the court proceedings, Nigel Scerri also resigned from the Board of Directors of the DIZZ Group, one of Malta’s major retail and lifestyle conglomerates headed by Diane Izzo. Though DIZZ Group made no public statement regarding the resignation, it is understood that the decision was taken to preserve the group’s corporate image amid growing public criticism of its association with Scerri.

The resignation came shortly before the couple was formally arraigned, further fuelling speculation that legal pressures and reputational risk prompted the move.

Public accountability and legal loopholes

The continued financial relationship between the Maltese government and Ennesse Ltd has raised critical concerns over public sector oversight. Despite the freezing order and the court proceedings, there appears to be no legal mechanism automatically disqualifying companies facing criminal charges from receiving direct government payments.

Legal experts have pointed to a regulatory grey area, where the absence of a formal conviction allows such companies to remain eligible for public contracts — even as their directors stand accused of serious crimes. Critics argue that ethical standards and public trust should take precedence in such scenarios, especially when the services provided are non-urgent and can be easily sourced from other licensed firms.

Mounting pressure for reforms

Civil society organisations and political commentators are now calling for urgent reforms in public procurement practices, particularly when it comes to entities under criminal investigation. The lack of transparency and oversight in direct orders, which are meant to be used in exceptional circumstances, has long been flagged as a systemic issue within Malta’s governance framework.

While the Health Ministry has promised a forthcoming tender process, its prolonged delay and lack of detailed public disclosure continue to undermine confidence in the system. As legal proceedings against Ennesse Ltd move forward, the government’s continued engagement with the firm remains a litmus test for Malta’s commitment to clean governance and the rule of law.

Conclusion

The continued engagement of Ennesse Ltd by Malta’s Health Ministry, despite the company and its owners being embroiled in a serious money laundering case, raises critical concerns about public procurement integrity, accountability, and the ethical oversight of government contracts. The case underscores the need for robust mechanisms that ensure public funds are only disbursed to contractors who meet high legal and ethical standards. Moreover, the prolonged use of direct orders in this scenario highlights systemic weaknesses in Malta’s procurement processes, particularly within the health sector.

As the court proceedings against Nigel and Mikaela Scerri continue, the government’s response—especially the delayed tendering process and ongoing payments—will likely face increasing scrutiny. Public trust hinges on transparency and decisive action, especially when state institutions are seen to be entangled with individuals facing serious criminal charges. With over half a million euros already paid to a company under legal and financial restrictions, Maltese authorities must take immediate and clear steps to ensure that procurement protocols are respected and that public money is managed with the highest level of responsibility.

FAQs

What is Ennesse Ltd and what services does it provide?
Ennesse Ltd is an accountancy firm owned by Nigel and Mikaela Scerri. It provides accounting and payroll services, particularly for Mount Carmel Hospital.

Why is Ennesse Ltd controversial?
The firm is controversial because its owners are facing money laundering charges and the company remains under a freezing order, yet it continues to receive public funds.

How much has Ennesse Ltd received from the Health Ministry?
Between June 2022 and March 2025, the company was paid over €500,000 in monthly direct orders for services rendered at Mount Carmel Hospital.

Why have payments to Ennesse Ltd increased?
Payments rose from €9,585 in June 2022 to €22,335 in February 2025. The reason for this significant increase remains unexplained by the Health Ministry.

What is the current legal status of Nigel and Mikaela Scerri?
Both have pleaded not guilty to money laundering and related charges. The court proceedings are ongoing.

Why is the Health Ministry still using Ennesse Ltd?
The ministry claims that a new tender is pending and that Ennesse Ltd is still required to fulfil accounting duties in the meantime.

What was Nigel Scerri’s involvement with DIZZ Group?
Scerri was a member of the board of directors at DIZZ Group but resigned just before his arraignment to avoid reputational damage to the company.

What happened with the Sliema real estate donation?
Nigel Scerri’s offer to donate property in Sliema for a social project was scrapped due to resident opposition and public skepticism about his motives.

Is it legal to award contracts to companies under criminal investigation?
While not illegal without a conviction, it is widely seen as ethically problematic and damaging to public trust.

What reforms are being called for in this case?
Critics are demanding stricter rules against awarding public funds to firms under criminal investigation and greater transparency in procurement.