Vatican prosecutors miss deadline in major financial trial appeal dispute

Vatican prosecutors missed an April 30 deadline to hand over the full investigative file in the Holy See’s biggest financial trial, reopening a dispute that now cuts to the credibility of the Vatican’s courts as much as to the fate of the convictions.

The Vatican Court of Appeal had ordered the prosecutors on March 17 to deposit the complete record after finding that procedural errors had nullified part of the original indictment against Cardinal Angelo Becciu and his co-defendants. Instead, prosecutors said in a three-page letter that the disputed material was irrelevant and could damage the Vatican’s interests. They said the evidence remained available to judges on USB drive, but not to the defense.

The clash goes to the heart of a case that has shadowed Pope Francis’ reform agenda. The trial ended in December 2023 after 86 sessions, with Becciu sentenced to five and a half years in prison and a fine. Eight others were convicted on financial charges, while some defendants were acquitted on certain counts or received lighter penalties. The case centered on a 350-million-euro investment by the Secretariat of State in a London property that Vatican officials hoped would become luxury apartments. The Holy See later sold the Chelsea property at a reported loss of at least $163 million.

Defense lawyers have argued from the start that the proceedings were unfair because key evidence was redacted or withheld, including witness interrogations and seized laptops and cellphones. The appeals court’s March ruling gave that argument fresh force, ordering renewed proceedings on specific evidentiary steps and full disclosure of the investigative record while preserving the legal effects of the 2023 judgment.

The dispute now hangs over the appeal scheduled for June 22. It also follows a separate setback for chief prosecutor Alessandro Diddi, whose January bid to reopen the case on a broader conspiracy theory was rejected by the Vatican’s highest appellate court. That court’s pushback, together with the missed deadline, has widened the sense that the system itself is under examination.

Vatican News reported that the court said the Vatican legal order does not formally incorporate the European Convention on Human Rights, even as it reaffirmed the right to defense and fair trial inside the Holy See’s own system. For a case that helped define the Vatican’s anti-corruption drive, the question is no longer only who was convicted, but whether the process that produced those verdicts can still command confidence.