Maltese authorities should process freedom of information requests (FOIs) quickly and transparently and be held accountable if they fail to do so, according to a Europe-wide study.

In a report measuring the health of the media landscape in Europe, the authors said there was an “urgent” need to bring the way FOI requests are handled in Malta in line with international best practice.

“Freedom of information requests need to be addressed in a timely and transparent manner – when authorities fail to do so, they should be held accountable,” says the Monitoring Media Pluralism in the Digital Era Report published by the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom.

In April, the government refused a Times of Malta FOI request about an investigation into alleged negligence at Mater Dei Hospital that left a baby needing a leg amputation abroad.

And in March, Public Broadcasting Services (PBS) denied a request for a breakdown of the costs of the Malta Eurovision song contest, a year after the Malta Film Commission declined to release the cost of the Malta Film Awards.

Authorities have in the past refused to share information about migrant arrivals and a report confirming the state-owned energy company Enemalta knew it was paying triple the original price to buy shares in a Montenegro wind farm project.

“Access to information remains a pressing concern in Malta, and not only for government-critical media,” the report said.

The difficulty in accessing information on matters of public interest, such as public spending, for the purposes of this report is a testament to the culture of secrecy and lack of transparency, it said.

Rating the right to information in the country as being at “high risk”, the report said it was more at risk than last year, highlighting “the general tendency of the government to sideline and ignore critical media".

Citing a letter sent to Prime Minister Robert Abela last year where Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights Dunja Mijatović criticised Malta’s "unwarranted secrecy within state institutions", the report said authorities’ refusal to release information wasted journalists’ time by reducing the news value of the information.

The Media Pluralism Monitor 2024 report also called for PBS to move out of state control and for party political broadcasters to “no longer enjoy the position whereby they get privileged access to information.”

The introduction of “sanctions” for companies failing to submit audited accounts to the Malta Business Registry and enhanced independence of TV and radio regulator the Broadcast Authority were also called for.

Social media 

The European University Institute also flagged politicians’ use of social media, which they said made it “easy” for them to “sideline” journalists and the mainstream media.

Noting that the government had a “leading position” as a buyer of advertising on Facebook, the report said the layout of social media content made it difficult for viewers to distinguish it from news content.

Zoning in on Robert Abela’s use of social media, the report said his Facebook page frequently publishes sponsored posts from press conferences, edited to the politician’s liking,” the reach of which it said was "further amplified by prolific pro-government groups.”

It noted that mainstream media felt “compelled” to use platforms like Facebook because of their popularity in the country, “despite very limited and diminishing returns”.

The report rated the viability of the media in Malta as being at “high risk” and riskier than last year, pointing to the use of social media as a major factor.

Media improvements

Calling the representation of minorities and gender equality in the media “dire”, the report highlighted “issues of gender imbalance, low visibility of minorities, and limited access to people with disabilities”.

Rating the profession, its standards and protects as being at “medium risk”, the report noted that “many voices” in the industry called for more protections for independent journalism.

It said “public warnings” should be issued to media organisations that fail to observe “fairness and transparency” about its choice of experts and how they represent minorities.

Overall, the health of the media in Malta was rated as being at "average risk", with a score of 37% risk (a higher percentage denotes higher risk).

Denmark scored the highest (13%) closely followed by Germany (16%), while Turkey came in bottom at 75% and was rated as being at "high-risk" in four out of the five main categories.