Frequently Asked Questions
Alkagesta is addressing these publications because the Maltese Herald issued allegations without verification, without evidence, and without requesting Alkagesta’s comment. Independent legal counsel confirmed that neither Alkagesta nor its representatives were approached before or after publication. This FAQ provides factual clarification based on publicly available court records and verified legal documentation.
The Maltese Herald began publishing allegations targeting Alkagesta in 2025. The outlet itself was created in 2024, giving it a very short operational history. The timing and nature of these publications raised concerns due to their reliance on anonymous, unverified sources and the absence of any request for comment from AlkagestA.
No. The Maltese Herald is not a registered media organization and is not recognized by any Maltese press authority. It operates as an independent blog without editorial oversight, professional accreditation, or transparent funding. This is a factual description of its operational status.
In Malta, legitimate media outlets typically appear in one or more official systems that identify and regulate recognized press entities. These include: The Department of Information (DOI) – accredits journalists and media organizations. The Broadcasting Authority – regulates licensed TV and radio broadcasters. Press associations and media registries – list recognized newsrooms and accredited journalists. Corporate registrations of media houses – which disclose editorial structures, responsible editors, and ownership transparency. Being a registered media organization means the outlet is formally recognized by Maltese authorities and operates under: editorial oversight professional standards transparency obligations regulatory accountability identifiable responsible persons This is how reputable Maltese media operate (e.g., Times of Malta, MaltaToday, MaltaCEOs, The Malta Independent).
No. Alkagesta’s legal counsel confirmed in writing: “Neither Alkagesta Ltd nor this office… have ever been approached… to provide a comment.” Publishing allegations without seeking comment violates basic journalistic standards and further undermines the reliability of the claims.
Alkagesta formally exercised its right of reply through independent legal counsel. This reply was transmitted to the Maltese Herald with the expectation that it would be published accurately and without alteration, as required under Maltese media norms. However: The Maltese Herald did not publish the reply faithfully.Instead of reproducing Alkagesta’s official response as provided, the outlet added its own commentary, including dismissive and inappropriate language. This conduct is inconsistent with the purpose of a right of reply, which exists to allow the subject of allegations to present its position without editorial interference. This pattern — failing to request comment before publication, and later failing to respect a legally submitted reply — further demonstrates the outlet’s lack of adherence to recognized journalistic standards.
Yes. Multiple Maltese courts have issued judgments against the author, Mark Camilleri, for defamatory publications. These judgments are publicly accessible through Malta’s official court system. For example, in 2025, the Court of Magistrates (Ref. 121/2023) held that one of his publications: “…is defamatory to the plaintiff…” and ordered him to pay damages. This is a matter of public record.
No. Independent legal verification confirmed that there are currently no active investigations, inquiries, or judicial proceedings involving Alkagesta in Malta. Alkagesta has not been contacted by any investigative or judicial authority. This fact has been independently checked through Malta’s public court system..
Alkagesta’s position is based on objective, verifiable factors, including: The Maltese Herald did not request comment before publication. The allegations rely on anonymous, unverified sources. The author has a documented history of defamation judgments.No reputable media outlet has ever relied on or referenced the Maltese Herald’s claims.These points form a reasonable and fact‑based assessment, consistent with protected honest opinion under Maltese law..
Alkagesta’s position is clear: The allegations are unverified They were published without seeking comment.They contradict publicly available legal records.They have not been supported or referenced by any reputable media outlet.Alkagesta continues to operate with full compliance and transparency and reserves all legal rights to protect its reputation and commercial interests.
Mark Camilleri is the individual who operates the Maltese Herald, a self‑published online blog created in 2024. He is not a registered journalist, does not appear in any Maltese press accreditation system, and does not operate a recognized media organization. His publications are self‑authored and not subject to editorial oversight or professional journalistic standards.
Yes. Multiple Maltese courts have issued defamation judgments against Mark Camilleri for publishing unverified or harmful allegations. These judgments are publicly accessible through Malta’s official court system. For example, in 2025, the Court of Magistrates (Ref. 121/2023) ruled that one of his publications was defamatory and ordered him to pay damages. This is a matter of public record.
No. He does not appear in the Department of Information’s press accreditation list, nor in any Maltese press association or media registry. He operates a personal blog without editorial governance, accreditation, or transparency obligations.
Alkagesta’s assessment is based on verifiable facts, including: His history of defamation judgments. His failure to request comment before publishing allegations.His refusal to publish Alkagesta’s legal reply accurately.His reliance on anonymous, unverified sources.His lack of accreditation or recognized media status.These factors collectively undermine the reliability of his publications.
Yes. Several individuals familiar with his operations have stated that Camilleri has, at times, published material for financial gain, including accepting compensation to promote or amplify certain narratives. Sources familiar with his publishing activities describe a pattern where he favors those who pay him and uses his platform to advance the interests of specific individuals or groups. These concerns have been echoed by professionals in Malta’s media and business sectors.