The determination was communicated by the president of the Vatican Court of Appeal, Monsignor Alejandro Arellano Cedillo, who unexpectedly closed the oral debate after the counter-rebuttals of the defenses and the civil parties, including the Institute for the Works of Religion (IOR), the Secretariat of State, and the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic See (APSA).
Procedural issues still unresolved
The Court will now rule through an ordinance on a series of procedural issues that could affect the development of the trial. Among them are the request for nullity of the first-instance process, the petition to incorporate documentation linked to the so-called Striano case, and controversies related to communications, documentary omissions, and actions of various witnesses and officials.
These issues have occupied much of the recent hearings and have been presented by the defenses as central elements for assessing the validity of the judicial procedure followed so far.
Opposing positions between defenses and prosecution
During the final interventions, several defense lawyers questioned the fairness of the process and denounced alleged violations of the right to defense. These objections were shared by legal representatives of various defendants, who insisted on the need for the court to rule before entering into the merits of the accusations.
For their part, the representatives of the civil parties defended the legality of the acts adopted during the investigation and maintained that certain decisions, including those adopted through pontifical rescripts, have normative value within the Vatican legal system.
The debate on the role of the Public Prosecutor’s Office
From the Vatican prosecutor’s office, the requests to incorporate judicial actions from Italian courts were rejected, considering them extraneous to the object of the ongoing process.
The promoter of justice emphasized the independence of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and defended the fact that there is no legal connection between proceedings opened outside the Vatican and the trial being conducted before the Vatican jurisdiction.
This point has been one of the most controversial in the debate, as it raises the relationship between parallel investigations and the autonomy of the judicial system of Vatican City State.
Awaiting a key decision
The lawyers for Cardinal Becciu reiterated publicly the innocence of their client and pointed out that, despite not yet having entered into the analysis of the specific accusations, they consider it essential for the Court to rule first on the alleged procedural irregularities raised from the beginning of the case.
The decision that the appeal court now adopts will be decisive for the future of the process and could mark a turning point in one of the most relevant trials of recent years in the Vatican.
Context note:
The Becciu case originates from a criminal trial initiated in 2021 against Cardinal Giovanni Angelo Becciu and other defendants for alleged financial crimes linked to an investment by the Secretariat of State in a real estate property in London, which resulted in million-dollar losses for the Holy See.
In December 2023, the first-instance court convicted Becciu, imposing a prison sentence, economic sanctions, and disqualification from public office, after considering him responsible for embezzlement and abuse of power.
Becciu has maintained his innocence and appealed the sentence to the appeal court, where both factual and procedural issues of the case are being reviewed.
The appeal has been marked by objections regarding the conduct of the investigation and the admissibility of certain evidence, including internal communications and documentary omissions whose assessment could influence the validity of the original verdict.