EU Observer: ‘Malta bows to EU pressure on passport sales’. Except that it hasn’t, really, has it?
The EU Observer reports today:
The Maltese government has introduced obligatory residence into its passport sale scheme under “tremendous pressure” from the European Commission.
The commission said in a statement after talks with Malta’s attorney general in Brussels on Wednesday (29 January) that: “No certificate of naturalisation will be issued unless the applicant provides proof that he/she has resided in Malta for a period of at least 12 months immediately preceding the day of issuing of the certificate of naturalisation.”
It added that Malta “informed” it of “its intention to evaluate whether an increase would need to be made to the current capping of main applicants.”
(…) read the rest in the link below.
Clearly, the EU Commission thinks in terms of straight dealers and not double dealers. It entered negotiations in good faith and on the understanding that the other party – the government of Malta – is in good faith too.
It appears not to have factored in that the government of Malta thinks of it as an opponent, an outsider, the enemy, and Il-Barrani, rather than as the managing director of the company on which, so to speak, it sits on the board with the common purpose of bringing that company’s interests forward.
The government of Malta went into those negotiations with the espoused intention of screwing the EU Commission, which the prime minister described as “persuading them not to interfere”.
They are now going to turn this ‘one year residency’ clause into yet another scam, using it to shut the EU Commission up, weaken the Opposition’s stance, put themselves in the right, while still doing exactly what they started out to do in the first place: sell passports to people who have no connection with Malta.
25 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://euobserver.com/justice/122925
The new Ramona Attard asked Busuttil whether he kept his residency in Malta serving as an MEP, during yesterday’s press conference.
That’s how alien these people are to the EU.
I am actually very disappointed with the European Commission right now. This one-year residency ‘requirement’ is not going to be in the least bit respected. These days with Schengen, it is going to be very easily for applicants to spend one day in Malta and then disappear the next day. A sham.
Agree 100 percent. With Schengen’s flexibility and the government’s / Henley intentioned to issue these fake residency ‘certificates’ at all cost, how could the EU be so naive?
The EU should realize by now that they are not dealing with a decent and normal country, but with a banana republic’s version of Putin’s autocratic Russia.
I second the sentiment. I expected the European Commission to request and impose a longer residence requirement not to mention minimum due-diligence standards. Instead, it has stamped a vague approval on the scheme.
I fear this may turn to a price war between member states. When the dust settles, the member states who relied heavily on the income will be up shit creek without a paddle.
And the ONLY way to prove that these persons have been in Malta for a year is if they go to the EU office in Malta and personally sign on a register while being recorded on closed circuit TV.
The EU should insist on controlling the residence proof itself.
This government is hell bent on cheating and cannot be trusted in its own promises.
How about making them pay tax here, even if only for one year?
I don’t trust Labour.
That still shouldn’t be the point. The point is still the sale of citizenship. What should be granted, and even then not sold outright, is residency.
This can’t be the end of the matter in diplomatic channels.
Could the 12 months refer to the aggregate stay one is expected to accumulate over the years? If not, and the rest of the EU members are content with the arrangement negotiated by the commission, then so be it. I main bone of contention was always the lack of consultation with our fellow EU members.
Is it possible that the European Commission did not spell out what it meant with a 12-month residency. According to our stubborn PM, the applicant can come over to Malta, buy zewg pastizzi, and off again to his homeland.
Can someone explain if the capping is for 1800 applicants or 1800 passports?
[Daphne – It has been explained ad nauseam already, many, many times over: 1,800 applicants and their families. It has also been explained that residency is defined as 183 days in a year, and not a year.]
Sorry to disappoint everyone, but Simon Busuttil seems to confirm the PM’s version of events, i.e. that the scheme now has the green light from the EU, and from the Opposition.
http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/imported/malta-and-commission-reach-agreement-on-citizenship-scheme/79507.aspx
http://www.newsbook.com.mt/artikli/2014/1/29/ftehim-mal-kummissjoni-ewropea-dwar-ic-cittadinanza.14342
Dr Joseph Muscat qal li:
– Investitur se jkun jista’ jixtri jew jikri proprjetà u awtomatikament jikseb status ta’ resident u tinħariġlu karta tal-identità.
– Applikant irid jistenna sena biex jieħu ċ-ċittadinanza u mhemmx bżonn li jgħix sena f’Malta iżda ma jfissirx li ma jkunx resaq lejn Malta.
Utterly disgusting. An investor who buys/rents property will be ‘automatically’ be given residence status and a Maltese ID card.
These were exactly my thoughts when I read yesterday’s report. I hope that the Commissioner keeps her eyes very wide open.
Labour cannot be trusted.
I don’t like the ‘at least 12 months’ because “at least” is not a definite period. I can imagine the hotch-potch that’s going to happen with these passports.
[Daphne – ‘At least 12 months’ most definitely IS a definite (minimum) period. It is idiomatic English for ‘a minimum of 12 months’.]
All the Nationalists need to do is reiterate that they will revoke any passport where the 12 month residency cannot be proven.
This makes me believe even more strongly that some of the first applicants will be shady people who have already resided in Malta, openly or secretly, for some time.
One comes readily to mind: Mary Swan, John Dalli’s friend and client, an international fraudster who has had to resort to the use of a false The Philippines passport in the past.
Today, I have heard of this person:
Bulat Utemuratov: “He is a former national security council secretary, advisor to the Kazakh president, and still ambassador for special assignments. He is on the Forbes list of richest billionaires. He is the owner of banks and other properties in Kazakhstan and Europe.
Made his billions while ‘serving’ as a top civil servant.”
Perhaps he’s to be the “role model” for civil servants?
A person of calibre?
The European Commission should never have agreed on a residency period of 12 months (which is actually 183 days). Citizenship should follow a lengthy period of residency which results in one being ‘absorbed’ by society. This inherently determines how serious one is in truly wanting a country’s citizenship.
The Prime Minister’s stance in hailing this latest amendment as minor and stressing that this doesn’t necessarily infer that applicants need to spend 12 months in Malta is arrogance at its best.
The saddest thing about all this is that the PL’s supporters are boasting that Simon Busuttil did some sort of U-turn. I have never fathomed how these people think, or whether they think at all?
If by coming out with a law, then change it three times plus a 90% condemnation from the European Parliament is a sort of a WIN, then there is truly no hope for these islands. Wonder what the switchers are actually thinking.
The scheme is still a sale of citizenship, 183 days in Malta notwithstanding, and it does not project any investment.
The Commission is now accepting at least what should be the minimum. It is up to us to decide whether we still want to give a price to our citizenship to persons who do not invest in our country, but only make a one-off purchase.
I just wonder if it is true, that these people really believe that their failures are successes, or they are so capable of believing what they feel is necessary to believe.
As expected Commissioner Reding has been well and truly screwed.
I am sure Something and Henley, aided and abetted by the Malta government, have already set up the mechanism to falsify the residence requirement.
Against payment of a fee, of course.
If the Malta government had any doubt that the new amendment would make it more difficult for potential applicants it would not have mooted the idea of increasing the cap. Quite the opposite.
The EU Commission seems so naïve in its dealings with the PL government that it is small wonder the Union is in such a terrible mess on most fronts.
The EU has been reduced to a monstrous gravy-train run by amateurs.
The moment Angela Merkel pulls the plug it will hit the buffers.
What is Kevin Plumpton on about urging the PN to work with government to attract investment? No, never. The scheme is morally corrupt. Unwise of Mr Plumpton to suggest such a thing.
The Labour Party wanted to hinder people who were studying or working abroad from voting because they were not residing in Malta for the required time.
Now they are eager to give passports to people who might never reside in Malta and have no connection with us.
Ma nistax nifhem l-EU. Fil-parlament Ewropew ivvutaw bi hgarhom kontra din li skema u issa, li baqa kollox kif kien, accettawa.
Min ser jixtri c-cittadinanza Maltija xorta m’ghandux ghalfejn jigi jghix hawn ghal sena ahseb u ara kemm ser jinvesti u johloq impiegi f’Malta.
Either the European Commission has betrayed the Maltese because 183 days is an extended holiday and not residency, or our prime minister has chosen not to be clear on the facts.