<i>Civis... sum</i>

"I am a citizen". The paramount document to prove citizenship is your passport. If that is put in doubt, how can you prove your citizenship? Unless the document is tampered with, then that is the final proof that has to be accepted by all countries that you are the citizen of the state which issued you with a passport. That should be simple enough. But not in Malta.

Some time back, Australians of Maltese origin were granted the right to be citizens of Australia while retaining or regaining their Maltese citizenship. Understandably, they cannot travel to the Passport Office in St Paul Street, Valletta, where the amiable staff would go out their way to help and cope with the workload which reaches its peak during the hot summer months. They have to apply for their Maltese passport in Australia where Malta has a High Commission in Canberra. The High Commission, like any embassy, is an extension of the Maltese government in a different continent, and its authority should be undisputed.

I have received an e-mail from Australia which states, among other things: "Since Malta joined the EU, as Maltese in Australia we have urged our children that while in Europe they must visit Malta. This they are doing in their hundreds. They are so proud to go back to their roots.

"Nowhere in the EU countries or elsewhere in the world is their Maltese passport ever questioned. Nowhere in Europe is their passport issued at the Malta High Commission in Canberra viewed with suspicion.

"It is only in Malta, when they come to deal with Malta Government instrumentalities, that the validity of their passports is in some doubt.

"If they need an ID card, a licence to drive, a work permit, etc., Maltese citizens with passports applied at and issued by the Malta Government official representatives in Canberra are told in no uncertain manner that they have to resubmit all the documents as their passport/citizenship need to be re-examined."

Reflections

The writer of that e-mail drew his own conclusions and made his own reflections. I prefer to draw my own. Although I have no doubt about the facts stated, as this comes from a person who is deeply involved in the welfare of the Maltese in Australia and he would be prudent enough to have not a single instance as a proof of his conclusions, I would give the authorities in Malta the benefit of the doubt that they know nothing about it.

If they know nothing, then let it be known that there is this complaint.

My suspicion is that there is some rethinking about the whole amendment to dual citizenship and that ways and means, of an administrative nature, are being resorted to. This is not the first instance that we have legislation which proclaims benevolent principles. When it comes to practice, then hurdles are put up to reverse the process.

Possibly the government wanted to give dual citizenship to the Maltese in Australia, and thought that the Maltese would remain in Australia, holding to their passport as a memento of their roots.

When I say that this is not the first time that legislation has been disregarded I am referring to specific cases. One of the most obvious is about marriages of Maltese women to foreigners. Although technically speaking the husband can take the citizenship of his wife after having been lawfully married to her, persistent "policies" are being put into practice which dissuade Maltese citizens from marrying partners of whichever nationality, and secondly, citizenship would take ages to acquire. I heard that the instructions are to delay the granting of citizenship to a foreign spouse acquire by up to 20 years. This is not fair.

Courage

If things have not worked out as the government wanted, then there is only one solution. Legislation should be reversed and reasons given for such a change. Then one can appreciate or criticise the motives of the measure.

To go about such matters in a Levantine way, upholding the right and denying its application, is a serious affront to the intelligence of any ordinary citizen. Perhaps the political calculation would think along these lines: "If the law is changed, then everyone knows about it, and there would be a debate and criticism. If this is done on an ad hoc basis, then only those concerned would find the stumbling blocks." I would say that this is an abuse of power. It is illegal. It does not respect the rule of law, the same law which the government has enacted in Parliament.

If there is any doubt about the authenticity of Maltese passports issued in Australia, then the authorities in Malta should check each and every case, and withdraw only those passports which are illegitimately issued. Otherwise it is not fair even to the EU partners to grant a passport which the country issuing it does not recognise. The photograph on my passport declares me to be a citizen of Malta everywhere.