No folks, the secrecy clause is not yet gone

Following a week in which Malta was put to shame across the globe for "finding new ways of human trafficking", coming up with a scheme "fit of a late night show", and being the ideal place for "traffickers looking for a solid base in Europe", "Chinese investors seeking to break through the EU's customs barriers" and "terrorists ready to take advantage of the Schengen zone", the Maltese government has announced it will backtrack on one of the most controversial aspects of the newly approved Citizenship Amendment Bill: the secrecy clause.

The inability of this government to anticipate that the new law would unleash a rampage of media onslaughts that would irreparably tarnish Malta's reputation, shows their dismal ability to govern the country seriously. The Opposition warned very clearly what the law would do to Malta's reputation. Whole sessions in Parliament were dedicated to this law. Amendments were moved to change many of its aspects, including this secrecy clause. But government stuck to its original plan and voted against, only for a U-turn on this sole aspect on the same day the President signed the approved Bill into force.

But let's leave all that aside for now and focus on what Deputy Prime Minister Louis Grech announced on Friday, and what Parliamentary Secretary Owen Bonnici said on the discussion programme Xarabank on the same day.

Both are claiming that government will change this clause without having to refer back to Parliament and vote to re-amend the Bill. They are claiming they will do it solely through subsidiary legislation.

In my opinion, this is unacceptable, and a grave show of contempt of Parliament, and I will explain why.

Malta's Citizenship Act (Ch. 188), up to last week included Article 25 which clearly stated the following:

(1) Not later than fifteen days after the end of every quarter the Minister shall cause to be published in the Government Gazette a list containing the name and surname of all the persons who shall have become citizens of Malta by registration or by naturalisation during the immediately preceding quarter.

(2) For the purpose of this article, "quarter" means any period of three calendar months beginning on the 1st January, 1st April, 1st July or lst October of any year.

In the Bill voted for by Parliament, approved last Tuesday, and signed by the President on Friday, one of the amendments substitutes and cancels Article 25 in its entirety, cancelling therefore the requirement to publish the names of those who become citizens by registration and by naturalisation.

Currently, it seems that we are in a scenario where the Minister may deem someone to be fit to become a citizen of Malta, both through the new passport-for-sale scheme AND through the normal naturalisation or registration processes, without publishing any names. That obligation is gone for ALL new citizenships.

It is not enough for Louis Grech to assure us that no new passports will be issued through the IIP, until the clause is revoked through "subsidiary legislation".

What he needs to confirm is that no new passports will be issued, not even for free, until the obligation to publish the names is re-introduced in the primary legislation: the Citizenship Act (Ch. 188).

Until that obligation is voted back into law in Parliament, no promise and no 'word of honour' by either Louis Grech, Owen Bonnici, Manuel Mallia or Joseph Muscat will suffice.