In a strongly worded European Parliamentary question, several MEPs have enquired about any action being contemplated by the European Commission to scrutinise the independence and effectiveness of Maltese law enforcement authorities.

The question was submitted by eight MEPs from the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) - Sophia In't Veld, Petr Je?ek, Maite Pagazaurtundúa Ruiz, Angelika Mlinar, Morten Helveg Petersen, Ivan Jakovčić, Louis Michel and Cecilia Wikström.

In the preamble to questions, the MEPs wrote:

"The murder of the journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in Malta shocked us all. Unfortunately, this event is not isolated from further worrying developments in the country. Several Members of the European Parliament undertook an ad-hoc delegation to Malta and drafted a mission report.

"The findings reveal serious challenges for the rule of law in Malta. These include a lack of media freedom, an unclear separation of powers, a lack of independence of the judiciary and law enforcement authorities, a lack of effectiveness in the fight against corruption, weak implementation of anti-money laundering legislation and the sale of citizenship."

The questions themselves were:

• "Does the Commission consider that this situation constitutes a clear risk of a serious breach of the rule of law by Malta?"
• "In view of the fact that mutual recognition and trust form the basis of theEU police and criminal justice cooperation, what action will the Commission take to scrutinise the independence and effective functioning of the Maltese law enforcement authorities, especially as regards cooperation between the Europol Financial Intelligence Unit, the Maltese Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit, and the Malta Police Force?"
• "Does the Commission agree that a stand-alone anti-corruption report is needed in order to address Malta's insufficient anti-corruption efforts, and that dealing with anti-corruption in the context of the European Semester will not suffice to that end?"

An ad-hoc delegation had written a scathing report about the rule of law in Malta, calling for an independent inquiry into the assassination of Caruana Galizia while also noting institutional shortcomings. The report slammed Malta's controversial cash-for-passport scheme, calling into question the credibility surrounding the due diligence processes. The delegation visited Malta between November and December 2017.

Last month, the government issued an official written reply to the report, in which it criticised MEPs for failing to be aware of the institutional procedure based on national law. It refuted criticism of the Attorney General and his dual role as state prosecutor while acting as counsel to the state, pointing out that many European nations operate under the same arrangement, and that there are mechanisms in place to prevent conflicts of interest such as having two separate and distinct departments within the office of the Attorney General.

MEPs have consistently been accused of receiving comments, observations and criticism about the state of the rule of law in Malta from sources that are inherently biased due to their affiliation to the Nationalist Parties.

In response to the government's reply, the MEPs retaliated by saying that while they are not as well-versed in Maltese law and the procedures surrounding Maltese institutions, the Prime Minister and his top officials had failed to address many over-arching observations.