The financial scandal of the Sloane Avenue building in London has the Vatican in a compromised situation.
But the problem is no longer solely the controversial real estate deal that cost the Holy See hundreds of millions of euros, but the possibility that the Vatican itself is actively weakening the judicial cases it promoted for years to pursue those responsible.
The London case had been presented as the great symbol of the financial reform promoted under Pope Francis’s pontificate.
The investigations, started in 2020, led to the historic criminal trial held in the Vatican and the convictions handed down in 2023 against several defendants, including Cardinal Angelo Becciu and financier Raffaele Mincione.
A trial that could end up collapsing
The situation became complicated after the Vatican appeals court ordered in March to review the entire investigation and the accusation process that gave rise to the trial.
The magistrates questioned the validity of several executive acts personally authorized by Pope Francis to allow the initial investigations.
The Pillar maintains that this decision opens the door to a particularly delicate scenario: that the macro-trial ends up being declared null, which would prevent retrying several of the main individuals involved in the controversial London financial operation.
For the Vatican, an outcome of this type would represent a devastating blow after nearly a decade of investigations, leaks, and enormous media exposure on financial corruption scandals at the heart of the Roman Curia.
The Secretariat of State stops collaborating
Last week, Swiss authorities archived the investigation against Enrico Crasso, a former financial manager linked to the Secretariat of State’s investments, because the Vatican refused to provide key witnesses for the procedure, including, as The Pillar recalls, Monsignor Alberto Perlasca and Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra.
The move has generated bewilderment among observers and jurists, since the Secretariat of State itself would be actively weakening judicial processes originally promoted to recover funds and demonstrate that it had been a victim of fraud.
New economic risks in the United Kingdom
The strategy could also have even more costly consequences in British courts.
Financier Raffaele Mincione keeps new legal actions open against the Secretariat of State in the United Kingdom, alleging that he acted with Vatican authorization and that he ended up being used as the sole responsible for the financial disaster.
The situation is particularly uncomfortable because some British courts have already issued ambiguous resolutions on the case.
Although English justice rejected declaring that Mincione acted “in good faith,” it also dismissed several fraud and conspiracy accusations made by the Vatican.
Additionally, during those proceedings, embarrassing episodes for the Holy See appeared, such as the statement by Archbishop Edgar Peña Parra acknowledging having authorized a five-million-euro invoice that he knew was “completely fictitious.”
If the Vatican continues to refuse to fully collaborate with foreign courts, judges could interpret that the Secretariat of State itself has de facto abandoned its accusations.
That would open the door to new judicial defeats and possible multimillion-dollar compensations against the Holy See.
From symbol of reform to symbol of failure
The real problem for the Vatican is no longer just economic.
For years, the London case was presented as the great demonstration that the Holy See was determined to combat internal financial corruption and professionalize its economic management.
However, The Pillar warns, if the trial ends up collapsing, if some of the main accused manage to avoid firm convictions, and if the Vatican itself ends up facing new multimillion-dollar losses, the scandal could end up becoming exactly the opposite: the most visible symbol of the limits, contradictions, and failures of the financial reform promoted during Pope Francis’s pontificate.