From Mr J. Azzopardi

David Lindsay’s article “Malta lags in implementation of crime, drugs and child pornography measures” (TMIS 8 July), may give the impression that the delay in the transposition of the relevant EU legislation implies that Malta does not have adequate legal measures to combat crime, particularly in the fields of drugs and child pornography. In fact, the said article states, “The meeting of EU standards has, for one reason of another, been problematic”. This however is not the case, so much so that administrative provisions are currently being made to transpose into national legislation the EU legal provisions referred to in the article.

In this regard, Legal Notice 150 of 2007 published on 5 June transposed Council Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family unification while Legal Notice 175 of 2007, published on 5 July, transposed Council Directive 2004/81/EC on the residence permit issued to third country nationals who are victims of trafficking in human beings or who have been subject to an action to facilitate illegal immigration, who cooperate with the competent authorities. Moreover, local legislation transposing the provisions Directive 2004/38/EC relating to compensation to crime victims and Directive 2004/80/EC on the right of EU citizens and their family members to move and reside freely in other member States, is expected to be published in the coming days. Preparations are also being made to transpose all the other EU legal provisions referred to in the article, including those relating to sensitive issues such as child pornography and drugs. Moreover, it should be noted that local legislation providing for the seizure of assets in relation to money laundering offences is in place.

It also has to be clarified that Malta’s delay in the implementation of the relevant EU legislation, including in particular the measures relating to child pornography and drugs, does not in any way imply that criminals will benefit from a lenient legal regime. In fact, our legislation on money laundering and confiscation of the proceeds of crime is completely aligned. There have been new instruments from the EU, however, which require adjustments to the legislation. These are being taken in hand. In the area of child pornography, again Malta has quite extensive legislation in place which addresses the matter; in 2006 the production or the possession of child pornography by a Maltese citizen or permanent resident in Malta was made a criminal offence regardless of whether the offence was committed in Malta or outside Malta. In the area of compensation to victims of crime, amendments were made to the Criminal Code to allow for regulations in this area to be drawn up. The issue, therefore, is not that compliance with EU standards is problematic for Malta but that new legislative instruments are being concluded continually and it takes time to bring into line Maltese legislation by means of appropriate amendments. In many cases, moreover, it is more a question of notification of implementing measures rather than the lack of such measures.

Finally, it should be noted that the concluding sentence of the article – “The European Commission announced this week that it would be taking Malta to the European Courts of Justice with regard to the freedom of movement and residence” – might be subject to misinterpretation. In fact, despite the delay in the implementation of certain specific measures in this area, Malta has already granted freedom of movement and residence as prescribed by the treaties, including the Treaty of Accession.

Joe Azzopardi

Communications Coordinator

Ministry for Justice and Home Affairs