Vatican appeals court declares mistrial in the ‘trial of the century’ against a cardinal

Vatican Appeals Court Declares Mistrial in High-Profile Financial Corruption Case

In a stunning judicial development that has shaken the Vatican’s legal system, the Holy See’s appeals tribunal declared a mistrial Tuesday in what had been dubbed the “trial of the century,” invalidating the convictions of Cardinal Angelo Becciu and several other defendants on charges of financial crimes.

The 16-page ruling cited significant procedural errors by both Pope Francis and Vatican prosecutors that nullified the original indictments. The court scheduled a new trial to begin on June 22, requiring prosecutors to submit all documentation “in their original form” by April 30, while giving defense attorneys until June 15 to prepare their motions.

Defense lawyers hailed the decision as historic, noting it effectively declared that certain papal actions lacked legal validity. “It shows that from the first moment, we were right to raise the violation of the right to defense and to request that the law be respected to have a fair trial,” said Becciu’s legal team, Fabio Viglione and Maria Concetta Marzo, in a statement.

The case originally centered on the Vatican’s controversial 350 million euro ($413 million) investment in London real estate. Prosecutors had alleged that brokers and Vatican officials defrauded the Holy See of tens of millions in fees and commissions during the property acquisition, then extorted an additional 15 million euros ($16.5 million) to cede control of the building.

The investigation expanded to implicate Becciu, once considered a possible future papal contender, who was eventually convicted of embezzlement and sentenced to 5½ years in prison. Eight other defendants were found guilty of various charges including fraud and abuse of office, with the court imposing tens of millions of euros in restitution payments.

Throughout the two-year trial, defense attorneys consistently complained about procedural irregularities. They argued that prosecutors withheld crucial evidence, redacted documents, and failed to provide complete cellphone records of a key prosecution witness. Perhaps most significantly, they discovered that Pope Francis had signed four secret decrees granting prosecutors extraordinary investigative powers, which were never officially published.

The appeals court largely agreed with these defense arguments. It ruled that one of Francis’ decrees—which allowed prosecutors to bypass the usual requirement of a preliminary judge—amounted to a law that should have been published. The failure to do so rendered it ineffective, according to the court. Additionally, the tribunal found that prosecutors’ failure to provide complete evidence to the defense invalidated their original indictments.

“The historic decision by the Court of Appeals—which, for the first time in Vatican history, ruled that a papal rescript was invalid and void due to failure to publish it—in our view results in the complete nullity of the entire investigation and trial,” stated attorneys Massimo Bassi and Cataldo Intrieri, who represent former Vatican official Fabrizio Tirabassi.

The ruling could have profound implications for any new trial. It potentially undermines prosecutors’ actions authorized by Francis’ decrees, including the June 2020 detention of broker Gianluigi Torzi, who was held for 10 days of questioning without charge or a judicial warrant, while having his electronic devices seized.

This represents the second major setback for Vatican prosecutors in the appeals process. In January, the Vatican’s highest Court of Cassation upheld a decision to dismiss prosecutors’ appeal due to a procedural error by lead prosecutor Alessandro Diddi, who subsequently resigned from the case rather than face potential removal.

The mistrial declaration comes just days after Pope Leo XIV, a trained canon lawyer, addressed Vatican judges and prosecutors at the opening of the judicial year. In remarks widely interpreted as referring to the Becciu case, Leo emphasized that “procedural safeguards, the impartiality of the judge, the effectiveness of the right of defence and the reasonable duration of proceedings” are essential to institutional credibility.

The Vatican’s unusual legal system, which combines elements of century-old Italian code with church canon law, has faced increased scrutiny throughout this case. The trial had been portrayed by the Vatican as evidence of Pope Francis’ commitment to financial transparency and accountability, making this reversal particularly damaging to those reform efforts.

As both sides prepare for the new proceedings, questions remain about which elements of the original trial might be preserved and which must be completely redone, adding further complexity to a case that has already exposed uncomfortable Vatican secrets regarding financial management, papal ransom payments, and internal power struggles.