Pope Francis’ problematic secret decrees in spotlight in Vatican’s ‘trial of the century’

Defense attorneys in the Vatican’s high-profile financial trial argued Tuesday that Pope Francis undermined defendants’ fundamental rights by issuing four secret decrees that granted prosecutors extraordinary investigative powers. The contentious hearing in the Vatican tribunal became so charged that at one point, presiding Archbishop Alejandro Arellano Cedillo requested defense lawyers avoid mentioning Francis by name directly.

This awkward request highlights the fundamental contradiction at the heart of the case: while popes are traditionally considered answerable only to God, Francis now stands accused of issuing decrees that violated defendants’ inherent rights.

The case centers on Cardinal Angelo Becciu and eight other defendants who were convicted of various financial crimes in 2023 following a sprawling two-year trial. The proceedings, which began in 2021, primarily focused on the Vatican’s 350-million-euro ($413 million) investment in London real estate. Prosecutors alleged that brokers and Vatican officials defrauded the Holy See of tens of millions in commissions and later extorted 15 million euros ($16.5 million) to relinquish control of the property.

Becciu, once among the Vatican’s most powerful officials, received a 5½-year prison sentence after being convicted of embezzlement. All defendants have maintained their innocence and filed appeals. The prosecution also appealed after the tribunal largely dismissed their overarching conspiracy theory, convicting defendants on serious but secondary charges instead.

The appeals process has been marred by significant developments. Last month, the Vatican’s highest court, the Court of Cassation, rejected the prosecutor’s appeal entirely due to a procedural error by lead prosecutor Alessandro Diddi. On the same day, Diddi abruptly resigned from the case after months of resistance, avoiding potential removal by the court.

Diddi’s departure follows revelations about a series of WhatsApp chats that have undermined the trial’s credibility. These messages document a years-long behind-the-scenes campaign targeting Becciu and suggest questionable conduct by Vatican police, prosecutors, and potentially the pope himself.

The current appeal focuses intensely on Francis’s role in the investigation. Defense attorneys argue their clients couldn’t receive fair treatment in what amounts to an absolute monarchy where the pope wields supreme legislative, executive, and judicial authority.

Central to this argument are four secret executive decrees Francis signed in 2019 and 2020 during the investigation’s early stages. These decrees granted prosecutors extraordinary powers, including unrestricted wiretapping authority and permission to deviate from existing laws. Critically, these decrees were never officially published, provided no oversight mechanisms or time limits for surveillance, and were crafted specifically for this investigation.

Legal experts have noted that such secret, ad hoc laws violate the principle of “equality of arms” between defense and prosecution—a fundamental requirement for fair trials. Even Vatican legal officials have privately acknowledged that the failure to publish these decrees created serious legal problems.

“Even in Iran and Russia, laws must be published,” attorney Mario Zanchetti argued on Tuesday, suggesting that failure to do so risks “making the Vatican’s procedural code fascist.” Zanchetti’s client, broker Gianluigi Torzi, had his electronic devices seized and was detained for ten days without charge based on powers granted by these secret papal decrees.

Attorney Luigi Panella characterized the decrees as providing prosecutors with “surreal carte blanche” to investigate. When Zanchetti attempted to clarify he wasn’t directly accusing Francis of wrongdoing but suggested the pope had been misled by prosecutors, Judge Arellano interrupted, requesting attorneys avoid naming Francis directly: “We all understand, if you avoid referencing the Holy Father.”

Previously, prosecutor Diddi had claimed the decrees provided unspecified “guarantees” for suspects, and the original tribunal rejected defense motions to nullify the trial. In their convoluted decision, the judges ruled no violation of legal principles had occurred since Francis himself had created the laws.

Zanchetti has offered the appeals tribunal a potential solution that would avoid directly ruling against the pope. He suggested the judges could classify the decrees as merely administrative acts that, having never been published, are legally “ineffective.” This approach could render evidence gathered under these decrees inadmissible without explicitly finding that Francis violated divinely inspired norms protecting defendants’ rights and dignity.

The case continues to present an unprecedented challenge to the Vatican’s legal system, forcing a confrontation between absolute papal authority and modern principles of justice and due process.