The European court has ruled against Malta’s investment-for-citizenship scheme. What do the islands’ lawyers think of this decision? Whoswho.mt asked several practitioners for their initial reactions.  

For Yakof Agius, the decision is politically motivated. 

“The decision goes against the opinion of the European Attorney General, and seems to be a reflection of the political bias towards these kinds of immigration solutions. Regardless of whatever political filter a person may want to look at these solutions, the fact remains that these schemes are an essential part of small economies like Malta, and other small countries outside the EU, like islands in the Caribbean for example,” Dr Agius told WhosWho.mt.

Yakof Agius’ company Yakof Agius & Associates specialises in the investment for citizenship programme. 

“Besides a huge investment pool, this scheme has channeled significant amount of money from a philanthropic perspective. NGOs, like Puttinu for example, have benefitted from funds made through the scheme, and has supported the Government’s ability to fund a number of important programs”.

Like any other initiative, the scheme has its due diligence process, that will need to be reinspected to fulfil Malta’s EU obligations that the court has ruled are failing through this golden passport scheme. 

“If the EU court has now insisted that there are breaches, Malta doesn’t have to stop the programme but needs to ensure it is filling its obligations."

For Maltese lawyer and Press Attaché in the European Court Jacque Rene Zammit, the decision, whether political or no, could be a landmark decision. 

“This is possibly a landmark decision. The judgment outlines the importance of EU Citizenship as ‘one of the major achievements of the solidarity which is at the very foundation of the integration process’ and which therefore forms part of the identity of the Union as a legal order accepted by the Member States on a basis of reciprocity." 

While Member States retain the prerogative of deciding who can become their national, Dr Zammit continued, the fact that this also grants EU Citizenship means that nationality cannot result from a commercial transaction. States are bound by the principle of sincere cooperation and their mutual trust underpins the establishment of EU Citizenship in the Treaties.

“Malta infringed EU law by maintaining its citizenship by investment scheme,” he finished.

The Malta Development Association (MDA), lambasted the decision, saying it is “very disappointed”. 

“It is also surprised by the extent to which the ruling totally ignored and overturned the Legal Opinion given by the ECJ's own Advocate General which endorsed the arguments of the Maltese Government,” it said.

“The Programme has been of great benefit for the economic development of the country and the MDA encourages Government to amend rather than abort it. MDA urges all political parties to Rise beyond partisan politics in issues of national importance.”

The European Court’s ruling against Malta’s golden passport scheme is a potentially landmark decision, with ripple effects to be felt within the bloc.