Recent notes on the law, fiction and reality

A law in Delaware

The subject of this first part is legal fiction, the use of fiction in law, and vice-versa. 

Legal fiction comes in at least two forms. First, that which concerns stories about lawyers and courtroom drama in the style of John Grisham and Perry Mason. Secondly, there are legal fictions which are employed by legal systems for different - occasionally useful - purposes.

One famous legal fiction is the bold assumption that people know the law and that accordingly their ignorance of the law is no excuse and does not amount to a valid defence. 

Companies are the creatures of law and may be given legal personality and other rights, which indeed they have. But they remain a legal fiction: they exist on paper, do not breathe and do not have a soul.

David Fabri

Now, we generally accept that only physical persons enjoy the right to vote. Recently, in May 2026, a court in Delaware (US), the friendly tax and corporate jurisdiction, confirmed that companies have the right to vote at elections. How did this happen? The logic is simple though slightly insane. Companies are deemed to be ‘persons’ for various purposes at law, so why not take things to the next level and recognise their right to vote. More companies are registered in Delaware than actual citizens.

A somewhat related current discussion enquires whether highly intelligent robots equipped with sophisticated AI may (or should) one day be given legal personality and awarded certain rights, even possibly human rights.

We really need to be careful in this area, and to clearly identify and to re-assess the various legal fictions and assumptions that the law creates. In the wrong hands, they might get out of hand with unexpected consequences. We may end up in a strange world where machines are given human rights, as well as the right to vote.

A law in Comino

On June 24, 2026, Moviment Graffitti released a video ‘showing how Government is enforcing illegitimate private interests in the Comino nature reserve’. 

MTA officials were filmed forcing tourists lying on a rocky part of the public beach, to move away, because this was not a public place and “here you pay”. ‘Although there were no sunbeds or umbrellas in the area where they were sitting, authority officials ordered them to leave and even threatened to call the police.’

This Comino beach towel incident raises issues of a certain importance which should not go unnoticed. Indeed, public outrage was palpable on all social media and newspapers, and rightly so as people here see the daily protests in Albania against land grabs by the rich and powerful, and they may relate to them. Public officials should not be promoting the best interests of the business operators, which have dominated Comino with impunity, year after year.

The video seems to show public guardians seemingly defending the wrong side. Whose side are these officials on and what is their true role?  An MTA statement in typical damage-control mode later confirmed that the area in question was indeed a public space, but it failed to criticise the behaviour of its employees and failed to undertake that such unacceptable conduct would not be repeated.

Public authorities in Malta never apologise and they avoid criticism of their failures.  They certainly steer clear of any self-criticism. Government later also added in its defence that this was an “isolated incident”. But they always say that don’t they?

An exciting read from the FIAU

The FIAU, our central anti-money laundering agency, recently undertook what appeared to be a long-overdue courageous move. In June 2026, the FIAU issued a statement announcing the publication of a ‘Strategic Analysis’ of organised crime in Malta. Finally, I thought, an FIAU document worth reading.

Regrettably, I was very wrong. What I found was a boring and inconsequential document that could have been compiled by a student. It turns out to be neither an analysis nor an investigation but just a list of the number of reports received and exchanged, with figures and data which lead to nowhere.

There is in fact no story in this bland and soulless supposedly strategic publication. There are no names, does not describe what organised crime gangs in Malta look like, or how they are organised and supported, how many they are or how they manage to operate and intermingle with politics and business.

It is an analysis without a conclusion or any useful finding and contains absolutely nothing on how many organised crime gangs have been identified, prosecuted and broken up. So, what was the whole point behind it? Was it just PR, or just to seem busy?

To conclude: at one point the publication itself forgets that it was supposed to be a ‘strategic analysis’ and suddenly describes itself as a ‘guidance document’. It is certainly not guidance as to how to carry out an analysis and investigation into organised crime, about which we remain none the wiser. 

David Fabri LL.D., Ph.D. has written and lectured extensively about financial services regulation, company law and consumer protection since 1994.