Malta's 'golden passport' program, enabling foreign nationals to purchase citizenship, is deemed unconstitutional by the European Union's highest court.
Unleashing the Fall of Malta's Golden Passport Scheme
Jump into the revelry as we dissect the nitty-gritty of Malta's much-adored golden passport saga, where immense cash flows were traded for EU access. As an informal guide, here's a straightforward, no-nonsense rundown.
For a cool €600,000 investment landing you a Maltese passport was once a cakewalk, offering rights to reside and work throughout the EU. The allure of this scheme, instigated in 2015, had already pocketed a substantial €1.4 billion for Malta by 2025. But the EU's highest court will soon shake things up.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ), in a historic ruling on 29 April 2025, deemed Malta’s citizenship-by-investment (CBI) scheme a no-go, contradicting its very essence of EU citizenship. The court reprimanded Malta for commercializing citizenship through a transactional process, disregarding mutual trust among EU members and defying the prerequisite of a "genuine connection" to a country[3][4].
While the CBI scheme boasted of fostering growth, the ECJ rules it a distasteful act that tarnishes citizenship, treating it as a commodity. The EU-wide furor arising from this ruling could potentially halt similar schemes across the bloc[2][4].
The Maltese government, unsurprisingly, expressed displeasure at the ECJ's decision, vehemently arguing it liquefies the crucial national sovereignty over citizenship matters[1]. Yet, the government is treading carefully, reviewing implications to ensure an alignment with the court's judgment[4].
On the horizon, we expect a redesign of the CBI program to incorporate stricter residency requirements or non-financial criteria that establish a "genuine link" between beneficiaries and the country[4]. Conversely, Malta could challenge legal avenues further, with the ECJ's ruling posing significant challenges for existing golden passport holders, whose European citizenship hangs in the balance[4].
In the whirlwind of political maneuverings and legal debates, remember that this ruling places a spotlight on the crucial bond between EU citizenship and genuine national connections[3][4]. After all, the EU citizenship-by-investment craze seems destined for a dramatic denouement.
Enrichment Data - Further Insights:- While the ECJ's ruling conclusively halts Malta's CBI program, it does not mandate revocation of existing citizenships. However, future legal challenges from the EU or member states cannot be ruled out, causing uncertainty for current golden passport beneficiaries[4].- The European Commission may intensify scrutiny of other residency-by-investment programs (RBIs) to ensure adherence to the ECJ's decision's underlying principles[2][4].- Malta's partner, Henley & Partners (the CBI program's architect), has aggressively defended the proposal, alleging that the ECJ ruling is politically motivated and lacks a clear legal foundation[1].- The ECJ judgement sets a significant legal precedent that may discourage other EU countries from adopting similar citizenship-for-investment schemes[2][4].
- The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled in 2025 that Malta's citizenship-by-investment (CBI) scheme, which offered Maltese passports for €600,000 investments, contradicts the essence of EU citizenship, finding it to be a transactional process that disregards mutual trust among EU members and the prerequisite of a "genuine connection" to a country.
- The ECJ's ruling in 2025 means that Malta's CBI program will need to be redesigned to incorporate stricter residency requirements or non-financial criteria that establish a "genuine link" between beneficiaries and the country.
- The Maltese government has expressed displeasure at the ECJ's decision, arguing that it threatens national sovereignty over citizenship matters, and has announced that it will tread carefully to ensure alignment with the court's judgement.
- While the ECJ's ruling does not mandate revocation of existing Maltese passports, future legal challenges from the EU or member states cannot be ruled out, causing uncertainty for current golden passport beneficiaries, whose European citizenship hangs in the balance.
