A constitutional court has found the state responsible for violating the fundamental rights of nine asylum seekers who were held aboard tourist boats during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

The case, brought by 32 asylum seekers who had fled war-torn Libya and were rescued in Malta’s search and rescue zone, stems from the government’s controversial decision to detain them offshore on private pleasure boats amid port closures.

The court’s decision, handed down by Judge Toni Abela, focused on the treatment and unlawful detention of nine individuals who had provided sworn testimony.

The asylum seekers claimed they were kept in limbo on the vessels for weeks without knowing why, unable to speak to lawyers, contact family, or request asylum. No formal detention orders were issued, and humanitarian organisations, including the UNHCR and Malta’s Agency for the Welfare of Asylum Seekers (AWAS), were denied access.

Judge Abela described the government's actions as creating conditions that were degrading and unlawful. While acknowledging the extraordinary circumstances posed by the pandemic, the court said that fundamental human rights remain non-negotiable — even in emergencies.

The court ruled that the conditions aboard the Captain Morgan vessels—including lack of sleeping space and inadequate sanitation—amounted to degrading treatment for the nine individuals who substantiated their claims.

Although the court stopped short of declaring the treatment “inhuman” or “torture,” it stressed that such conditions violated protections enshrined in both the Maltese Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.

Illegal detention on land

Crucially, the court distinguished between the offshore confinement and what followed when the migrants were eventually brought to Malta. Once on land, they were placed in detention centres without receiving any formal detention orders or reasons for their continued custody.

Here, the court found the state had violated the right to liberty by failing to provide a clear legal basis for their detention—a breach that made it impossible for detainees to challenge their confinement through legal channels. Judge Abela insisted on the importance of procedural safeguards, ruling that the absence of proper detention documentation was unlawful.

State advocate held responsible

While the government had argued it acted in good faith under exceptional circumstances, the court rejected attempts to shift blame or rely on the pandemic as justification for breaching core rights.

However, it did accept that the State Advocate—as the government’s legal representative—is the proper party to be held accountable, and dismissed the prime minister and other senior officials from the case.

Due to a procedural error by the applicants, the court declined to rule on alleged violations under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, stating that the correct legal filing was not used. As a result, claims concerning the right to asylum and dignity under the Charter were not addressed on their merits.

The court ordered the State Advocate to pay €20,000 in compensation to the nine successful applicants for the rights violations they suffered, along with legal interest from the date of judgment until payment. Each party will bear its own legal costs.