Malta and the European Commission in a heated courtroom debate! Whose right is it to grant EU citizenship?
On June 18, 2024, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg became the focal point of the global legal community and international politics. On that day, tensions between the Republic of Malta and the Council of Europe escalated to unprecedented heights. The two sides engaged in a passionate and controversial legal debate around Malta's naturalization by investment scheme - known as the MEIN policy. The debate is not only about a single country's policy, but also about the legal and ethical framework for the authorization of citizenship in the EU as a whole, challenging the mechanism for the authorization of citizenship in the EU and its impact on the sovereignty of member states. The Maltese Government argued that the scheme was in the national interest, while the European Commission insisted that the policy violated the principle of good faith cooperation within the EU and undermined the integrity and fairness of the EU system as a whole.
The core controversy
The European Commission has accused Malta's naturalization by investment scheme of violating EU law and, in particular, undermining the principle of honest cooperation between member States. The scheme allows individuals to acquire citizenship through significant financial contributions without establishing a substantial link to Malta, thereby threatening the integrity of EU citizenship as a whole.
Position of the European Commission
- Genuine Link Requirement (GLR): The EC maintains that, under EU law, the granting of nationality must be based on a substantial link with the granting State.
- Integrity of EU Citizenship: The way in which nationality is conferred without a substantive link undermines the relationship between member States based on mutual trust and solidarity.
- Violations of Sincere Cooperation: Malta's conduct is considered to be in violation of the Convention.Treaty on European UnionThe principle of good faith cooperation, as set forth in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, means that the acquisition of nationality should not be permitted to be based solely on monetary transactions.
Defense of Malta
- National Sovereignty: Malta argues that the granting of nationality is part of its national sovereignty and that both international law and the Treaty on European Union give each member State the right to define its own criteria for nationality.
- Historical Precedence: Presenting similar examples of nationality conferred by investment in European history, such as16century Netherlands.
- Safety and security andDue Diligence (Security and Due Diligence): Emphasizes that its Citizenship by Investment Program covers rigorous security vetting and due diligence measures to ensure that new citizens do not pose a risk to the national or EU legal framework.
Exciting interactions in the courtroom
- Allegations of legal changes in the EC: Malta reveals the EC's commitment toCBIThe change in the project's attitude, noting that the EC's position has shifted from initial neutrality to now explicit opposition, is a change that may have weakened the consistency of its arguments.
- Judge's challenge to genuine link: The judges questioned the"genuine link"The legal basis for this new standard and its definition explore the legitimacy and necessity of this standard.
Conclusions and outlook
The European Commission's action is not only directed at Malta, but is a comprehensive review of the entire EU at the level of authorized citizenship. From Ireland shutting down its Citizenship by Investment program and Greece's Golden Visa price hike, to the forced suspension of programs in Cyprus and Bulgaria, and Portugal revising its high-profile Golden Visa program several times over the past two years, this series of actions demonstrates the EU's reassessment and strict regulation of the practice of acquiring citizenship by investment. This courtroom showdown between Malta and the EC may only be the beginning, foreshadowing the possibility of similar actions against other member states in the future, reshaping the immigration and nationality granting framework across the region.
Fast Track Naturalization (Passport Program) Final Option
Meanwhile, in the United States, another battle involvingSaint Lucia and Saint Kitts and Nevisprosecutions are also kicking off, with leads that include the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security and involve the Transportation Security Administration, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Secret Service, and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Administration, demonstrating the intense attention and scrutiny of citizenship policies around the globe. Currently in the only remaining expedited naturalization program, due to theAntigua in2024Blacklisted by the EU for non-cooperation in 2007Dominica and Grenada have become the only remaining safe options. Affluent individuals who want to quickly acquire a second citizenship through the Citizenship by Investment Program should seize the opportunity to make a decision on the right citizenship program as soon as possible, while their financial means are sufficient and their reputation is in good standing.
Extended Reading
comparisons
Bih Bih Channel
Click here to directSchedule a VIP ConsultationDominica Citizenship Program
- The Dominica Citizenship Naturalization Program was established in 1993 A.D. and is one of the oldest naturalization programs in the world.
- passport immigrationApplicants are not required to attend an interview
- Immigration can be processed quickly: the time it takes is about 2-3 months.
- The most cost-effective program for single applicants
- The status can be passed on permanently to the next generation in the direct line.
- Consultationreserve