Thousands descended on Valletta on Wednesday both in solidarity with the family of assassinated journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia and in protest against a government which has dragged its feet when it comes to implementing the reforms recommended by the public inquiry appointed following her murder.

The public inquiry issued its report on 29 July 2021. It found the State responsible for creating a culture of impunity that allowed Caruana Galizia's murder to happen, and it made a host of recommendations for the government to take on board.

A key recommendation was that the government should formally apologise to the journalist's family and acknowledge its failings - something that Prime Minister Robert Abela did when the report was issued.

But fast forward five years, very few of the other recommendations have been implemented - be them legal reforms, constitutional reforms, or reforms to safeguard journalists.

Wednesday's protest was exactly two weeks after a jury acquitted businessman Yorgen Fenech of charges of complicity and conspiracy in connection with Caruana Galizia's murder. The prosecution intends to appeal the verdict, while three jurors and a reserve juror were arrested and questioned by police in connection with the trial on Thursday and Friday.

The protest saw an attendance of thousands, and it was equally about offering solidarity to the Caruana Galizia family - but also about putting pressure on the government to introduce the necessary reforms to the country.

But what are these reforms? The Malta Independent on Sunday analyses what the public inquiry had recommended, and what has been implemented and what hasn't.

Unexplained wealth orders, abuse of office, obstruction of justice: seven out of eight legal recommendations remain untouched

The public inquiry made several recommendations for specific amendments to be made to Malta's laws in order for new crimes to be introduced into the Criminal Code and for existing laws to be consolidated.

Out of eight recommendations here, one has been partially implemented while the rest remain untouched.

Some of these recommendations concerned specifically those in public office: one seeks the criminalisation of any attempted or actual hindrance of the duties of the police or other authorities by a public official, and another seeks the criminalisation of abuse of office by a public official or a person in charge of a public service.

The abuse of office proposal is particularly significant: it is an offence which effectively is designed to make it a crime for a public official to use their official position to gain unlawful benefits or to harm others.

Last year, Commissioner for Standards in Public Life, Joseph Azzopardi, who is a retired Chief Justice, had also said that abuse of office by those that hold a State position should be made a criminal offence.

He made this recommendation in his annual report published in July 2025 as he referred to his investigation into the engagement of Amanda Muscat - the then-girlfriend and now-wife of then-Tourism Minister Clayton Bartolo - as a consultant at both Bartolo's Tourism Ministry and Clint Camilleri's Gozo Ministry

As things stand right now, misconduct in public office remains undefined in Malta's laws.

The inquiry had also recommended that there should be legislative provisions in the Code of Ethics for public officials to "safeguard against improper conduct of public officials in the execution of their duties". This recommendation has not been adopted either.

Another criminal offence that the public inquiry recommended is the crime of obstruction of justice, also covering those engaging in the perversion or attempted perversion of justice.

The offence of obstruction of justice is well-known in jurisdictions such as the United States, and it refers to the crime of wilfully interfering with the administration of law, or with police investigations, or with judicial proceedings.

In Malta, there is no catch-all law that places such an offence as a crime, although the law does currently have a clause that pertains to witness tampering.

Another legal amendment that the public inquiry sought was to criminalise mafia-style association.

This was inspired from Article 416 bis of Italian Criminal Code, which stipulates that people belonging to a mafia-type organisation made up of three or more individuals would be liable to imprisonment. The term "mafia-type organisation" is defined as an organisation whose members use the power of intimidation, subjugation, and conspiracy of silence in order to commit illegal activities.

Prime Minister Abela had taken specific umbrage at this amendment when it was proposed by the Nationalist Party back in early 2022, saying that introducing such a law would be "recognising Malta as a mafia state".

The Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation itself had some reservations on this particular recommendation, saying that this legal tool "may be less effective than updated anti-racketeering laws combined with more effective and well-resourced investigative units within the police, and a more efficient court system".

The inquiry also sought the introduction of Unexplained Wealth Orders as a means of fighting financial crime, including bribery and corruption.

An Unexplained Wealth Order is a court order that can be used to require a person to prove that assets that they possess were acquired using their known legal income, and it features in the laws of countries such as the United Kingdom.

It is a particularly useful tool when it comes to investigations concerning money laundering and organised crime, where criminals would have cleaned the ill-gotten gains of their crimes by purchasing items such as property, vehicles, or luxury items.

This measure remains unimplemented, and was among the measures tabled by the PN that the government voted against back in 2022.

The only partially implemented measure from this category of recommendations was one for the law governing the Attorney General to be revised so to fully implement the recommendations of the Venice Commission vis-à-vis the office having full control of the investigation of serious crimes together with the police as well as having the ability to initiate an investigation directly.

Protection for journalists: Almost all areas remain sorely lacking in reform

Many other measures revolved around improving safety for journalists and improving the regulatory framework around the media.

To credit where it is due, particularly to the Malta Police Force, there have been measures on the protection of journalists that were recommended and that have been implemented.

For instance, there is now a formal structure within the police to identify which persons, including but not limited to journalists, would be exposed to serious attacks of all kinds and for any reason which may escalate to physical violence.

The inquiry further recommended that the police have an operational unit with an element focused on journalists who may be at serious risk due to their work, and this has been implemented via the Police Force's protection unit.

Also implemented was the recommendation to establish a committee of experts which would examine the state of journalism with the purpose of seeing that the recommendations made in the public inquiry are implemented in a "holistic and organic framework".

This committee was established in February 2022 and its report was presented to the government on 4 June 2023 - but the contents of the report remain pretty much untouched.

The way in which this recommendation was satisfied was also criticised not least by the Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation itself. The criticism was on the basis that the heads of independent newsrooms were appointed to the committee by the Prime Minister and paid by the government for their work.

Three reforms were then proposed at a Constitutional level - none of which have been implemented.

The first is to insert articles in the Constitution which recognises freedom of journalism as one of the pillars of a democratic society that the State has the obligation to guarantee and protect, and which also recognises the right to information from the State and public administration and the obligation for them to provide such information.

The second was "to ensure the highest level of journalism and compliance, even from journalists, of the principles of ethics which govern the profession" by creating an independent Office of the Ombudsman or a Commissioner for Journalistic Ethics along the same lines as the Commissioner for Standards in Public Life.

The third related to reforming the Broadcasting Authority, which the inquiry said has failed in its duty of impartiality.

On a legislative level, the inquiry called for the revision of the Freedom of Information Act "so that the instances where public administration may arbitrarily refuse to provide information, which is of public interest and to which the public has a right, should be limited".

The next recommendation was to address the issue of SLAPP libel suits, eliminate the possibility of frivolous cases being filed against journalists, and ensure that libel suits are dropped if the journalist who is subject to them passes away.

There have been no revisions to the Freedom of Information Act since the inquiry issued its report, though there was some progress on the SLAPP suit law.

In this regard, Malta transposed the EU anti-SLAPP directive via a legal notice, becoming the first country to do so, but there remain questions as to whether that law went far enough. For instance, libel suits can still be inherited by a journalist's heir should the journalist pass away.

The inquiry also said that the distribution of public funding spent on advertising should be fair, equal, and non-discriminatory, but nothing has been visibly implemented in this regard.

Finally, the public inquiry proposed a law which "provides an organisational framework in which journalists may operate freely and totally independent from interference or undue pressure".

Such a law, the inquiry said, should allow for the journalistic profession to be self-regulated on the same basis that is offered for other professions such as accountants and architects. This would be by an organisation which is "totally independent and autonomous even from the financial aspect" - with the latter point being the main impediment for why this body could not be the Institute of Maltese Journalists.

The suggestion, although not implicitly mentioned, is that journalists would be required to obtain a licence or warrant in order to be formally recognised as journalists, a topic which has come up in public debate in recent weeks.

It's been a controversial debate: the Institute of Maltese Journalists has come out against the concept, as has the Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation. The government is yet to formally comment on the idea.

The vast majority of all of these measures remain unimplemented.

The government had proposed a sweeping media reform in October 2022, but it did so without public consultation and before its own appointed Committee of Experts had even concluded its work. While the reform included changes reflecting some of the recommendations made by the public inquiry, it was ultimately shelved for consultation.

The government had proposed changes such as that libel cases would be dropped if the journalist who is facing them passes away, and that freedom of the press, the role of the media, and the protection of sources would be enshrined in the Constitution.

But as criticism mounted, the bills were put out for public consultation, with the latest such round being in August 2025. That consultation closed in October 2025, and thus far no further reforms have been tabled.

The aftermath of the trial against Fenech, which resulted in his acquittal, has now resulted in renewed pressure for the public inquiry's reforms to come back to the table.

Protestors descended in their thousands on Wednesday to call for exactly this: for the creation of a framework which ensures that what happened to Daphne Caruana Galizia never happens again.