The most intriguing case is of Francesca Chaouqui,
In the first big scandal to hit the papacy of Pope Francis, Ms Chaouqui was put on trial for leaking documents to two Italian journalists who subsequently wrote best-selling books about corruption, infighting and skullduggery inside the tiny city state.I question how this is the "first big scandal", but I'll let that go. Ms Chaouqui, a thirtysomething public relations consultant, was put on a "financial reform commission" by Francis soon after his accession in 2013. I haven't been able to find the actual name of this commission -- it may be related to a commission or commissions set up in response to "Vatileaks I" discusssed in yesterday's post -- but I think it's interesting that a PR person would be put on a financial commission and then be accused of leaking information.She was convicted by a Vatican court last year and sentenced to 10 months in jail in what was dubbed the Vatileaks II trial, but was given a suspended sentence because she was pregnant.
UPDATE: A visitor referred me to this site (in Italian), which calls it "Cosea , the reference commission for study and orientation on the organization of the economic and administrative structures of the Holy See, led by the Spanish monsignor Lucio Angel Vallejo Balda. Both were arrested in the Vatican for the leak of information and disclosure of confidential documents."
Er, why have a PR flack of any sort on such a commission? Normally, in a real country with real banking, securities, and tax laws, such a commission would have members from major audit firms and outside counsel. PR duties, if any, would go to someone's staff and be limited to tight-lipped announcements. A full report would be confidential, and CEOs and such would quietly resign to "spend more time with their families". Instead, in the Vatican, we have a sexpot on the commission itself freelancing like an Italian Nancy Drew to get her own secret messages from the conspirators:
In her book, In The Name of Peter, the 35-year-old public relations executive reveals for the first time that she had a mole in the Vatican’s powerful Secretariat of State.Well, this commission's sure gonna get to the bottom of the whole thing, huh? Maybe they need to hire Inspector Clouseau as well.He kept her abreast of what was going on there by leaving secret notes in a confessional in the 16th century San Luigi dei Francesi church, which is famous for Caravaggio paintings that hang on its walls.
Emiliano Fittipaldi and Gianluigi Nuzzi are two Italian journalists indicted by the Vatican for publishing classified information from Ms Chaouqui in books. However,
Nuzzi and fellow journalist Emmanuele Fittipaldi were put on trial in a Vatican court in 2015 after both published books based on leaked documents that exposed the greed, mismanagement and corruption at the highest levels of the Catholic Church. In July 2016, after an eight-month trial, the Vatican’s criminal court declared it had no jurisdiction to prosecute them.The first, and by far the most basic, question I have is why the US bishops -- and Cardinals DiNardo and O'Malley, with Abp Gómez, strike me as accomplished institutional actors -- would make requests for some new sort of Vatican commission, a lay-led investigation, and "transparency", when it could not be clearer what the result would be even if Pope Francis agreed this was a good idea. In fact, if I were Francis, I'd be saying, "Signora Chaouqui! It's all been a huge mistake! I now need your expertise to chair this extremely important new commission!"The court did, however, convict Monsignor Angel Lucio Vallejo Balda, who was sentenced to 18 months, and public relations consultant Francesca Chaouqui, who was sentenced to 10 months.
On the other hand, that Ms Chaouqui and a couple of other minor players should be convicted, while the two Italian journalists get off on a jurisdictional issue, raises another interesting question, the legal and diplomatic status of the Vatican, which I'll try to get to, or at least start with, tomorrow.
