The European Commission has failed to prove that EU rules on citizenship require "a genuine link" or "prior genuine link" to grant citizenship, the EU’s Advocate General has decided.
In what is considered a key development in the ongoing legal battle between the European Commission and Malta over the controversial golden passport programme, the Advocate General rejected the commission’s arguments. It is the penultimate stage before the European Court of Justice decision on Maltese citizenship-by-investment scheme.
Advocate General Anthony Collins noted that the issue of nationality falls under the sovereignty of individual member states, which retain the right to set their own conditions to grant citizenship.
His opinion, though not legally binding, typically carries significant weight in the final ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
A final judgment in the case is expected at a later date.
In response to the Advocate General’s opinion, the Maltese government expressed optimism and welcomed the findings.
Malta’s ‘Citizenship by Naturalisation for Exceptional Services by Direct Investment scheme’, as amended in 2020, allows non-EU nationals to obtain Maltese citizenship by making substantial financial contributions to the country.
Applicants must fulfil various criteria, including purchasing property, investing in Maltese assets, and making a significant donation to the National Development and Social Fund.
The so-called golden passports scheme, which was first introduced in Malta in 2014, before being amended six years later, has faced criticism from both within and outside Malta.
The European Commission had launched the legal challenge, arguing that Malta’s scheme violated EU law, specifically Article 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
It contended that the programme permits citizenship to be granted without the individual establishing a genuine or prior link with Malta, which it argued undermines the integrity of EU citizenship.
The Commission had previously appealed for both Malta and Cyprus to end their schemes.
According to the Advocate General, the Commission had failed to prove that EU law imposes an obligation for such a link, which is not explicitly stated in any EU treaty.
He further explained that while EU law governs many aspects of citizenship, it does not define the specific conditions for acquiring it.
These are left to the discretion of national governments, in line with the principles of national sovereignty and identity.
He concluded that Malta’s citizenship scheme, which allows individuals to obtain nationality through financial investments, does not breach EU law, provided it adheres to the country’s domestic legislation.
In a statement, the home affairs ministry welcomed the opinion as a validation of Malta’s position, stating that it supports the country's long-standing view that decisions related to citizenship should remain within the purview of national governments.
Minister Byron Camilleri highlighted that the opinion echoes Malta’s arguments, asserting that citizenship remains a matter of national competence.
Camilleri said that while the government will continue to closely assess the opinion and its implications, the Advocate General’s conclusions mark a positive step in the ongoing case.
“While we await the final judgment, this is a step in the right direction. We will continue working in the best interest of our country,” he said.