Malta is currently embroiled in significant disputes with the European Commission, revolving around its controversial ‘golden passport’ scheme and its legal shielding of Malta-licensed iGaming firms. These conflicts highlight deeper tensions between national sovereignty and EU-wide legal frameworks.
Malta’s Golden Passport Scheme: Citizenship for Sale?
The controversy surrounding Malta’s citizenship-by-investment program has drawn sharp criticism from the European Commission (EC). The scheme allows wealthy investors to obtain Maltese—and thereby EU—citizenship in exchange for financial contributions. However, the EC viewed this practice as a commodification of Union citizenship, fundamentally violating EU laws.
Key Points of the Dispute
- The European Commission argued the scheme lacked a requirement for a “genuine connection” to Malta, raising concerns over compliance with EU principles.
- Malta defended its stance, citing national sovereignty in deciding citizenship matters and dismissing the necessity of a genuine link in EU law.
- In April 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled against Malta, declaring its program incompatible with EU citizenship principles and the principle of sincere cooperation under Article 4(3) TEU.
The ruling means Malta must terminate its golden passport program and serves as a warning for other EU states operating similar schemes.
Article 56A: Shielding Malta’s iGaming Sector
The introduction of Article 56A by Malta, aimed at protecting its iGaming license holders from cross-border litigation, has sparked another legal dispute with the EU. This law allows Malta-licensed gambling operators to avoid enforcement of foreign judgments within the EU, creating friction in legal cooperation.
Concerns Raised by the European Commission
- The EC claims Article 56A undermines trust in EU-wide judicial cooperation by shielding Malta licensees from foreign legal actions.
- It distorts jurisdictional rules and prohibits the fair recognition of other member states’ legal judgments.
- Malta has been given two months to revise or repeal this law to address the EC’s objections or face legal proceedings.
This development highlights ongoing tensions between Malta’s regulatory priorities and the single market principles upheld by the EU.
Balancing Sovereignty and EU Integration
At the center of these disputes lies a broader issue: the clash between Malta’s national sovereignty and its obligations as an EU member. While Malta defends its right to self-determination in citizenship and regulation, the EU argues that these practices disrupt foundational principles of Union citizenship and cross-border cooperation. The April 2025 CJEU ruling underscores how the EU now places legal harmonization above individual member state priorities.
Conclusion
The disputes over Malta’s golden passport scheme and Article 56A legislation reflect the growing tension between national interests and EU-wide legal frameworks. The CJEU’s ruling on citizenship and the EC’s stand against regulatory shielding suggest heightened scrutiny on non-compliant practices. Malta’s next steps will determine whether it can align with EU principles without compromising its sovereignty.
