Dual citizenship amendments before Parliament

The House of Representatives has started to debate a Bill to grant Maltese citizenship by registration to second and subsequent generations of Maltese descent living abroad. The Bill also grants Maltese citizenship by registration to persons born abroad, before independence, to mothers born in Malta who became citizens of Malta on that date.

The debate was opened by Home Affairs Minister Tonio Borg, who also gave details on the Bill at a press conference last week.

He told the House that this Bill was being moved following repeated requests by migrants.

The minister also recalled how the Citizenship Act had been amended over the years. Until 1989 it had not been possible for a Maltese citizen to hold dual citizenship. In 1989 it became possible for migrants born in Malta, who would have acquired another country's citizenship to reacquire Maltese citizenship as well.

But this exception applied only to Maltese emigrants who were born in Malta. People born in, say, Australia to Maltese parents were Maltese at birth but lost their Maltese citizenship on acquiring their Australian one. In 2000 it became possible for Maltese born abroad to acquire dual citizenship. Through this reform, all Maltese born who lost their Maltese citizenship to acquire another country's could get their Maltese citizenship back automatically and retroactively if they spent six years or more abroad and by application, if they lived in Malta.

Dr Borg said many migrants still did not know they had again become Maltese. The government's records showed that people who were in contact with the Citizenship Department numbered 12,000 but many more had benefited since they were granted their citizenship automatically and did not all need to contact the department.

Another amendment approved at the time provided that to acquire citizenship by marriage one had to have been married and living with his spouse for five years. This had limited marriages of convenience which were also made a crime.

Another important reform in 2000 was that persons born abroad to a Maltese mother between 1964 and 1989, could apply for Maltese citizenship. However, the principle remained that those born abroad had to have either of their Maltese parents born in Malta in order to become a Maltese citizen at birth. This meant that while first generation Maltese were Maltese at birth because their parents or one of them was Maltese, their children were not because, although Maltese, they would not have been born in Malta.

As a result of this Bill, although second generation Maltese would still not become Maltese at birth, they would be able to apply for Maltese citizenship without having to come back to Malta. All they had to do was prove they were direct descendants of someone born in Malta.

This reform, the minister said, was not just for the second generation of Maltese born abroad but also for subsequent generations as long as Maltese citizenship was not lost anywhere along the line. This was what common sense called for. A three-year grace period was being given and, if anyone died without applying for citizenship during this period, the government would assume they did if their children applied for citizenship.

Dr Borg praised migrants for having retained their roots with Malta and that Maltese was still being taught to many second generation Maltese. He hoped that more assistance could be given to the migrants, such as sending teachers to Australia for a year to teach Maltese.

Opposition Home Affairs spokesman Gavin Gulia expressed the Opposition's backing for this Bill. He was proud of the way how the Maltese in Australia treasured and loved their roots. This applied not just for those who migrated from Malta, but also their descendants, some of whom had learnt Maltese and followed Maltese culture even though they never set foot on Malta.

Dr Gulia said that it had been Labour's intention to move the amendments which Dr Borg eventually passed in 2000. Labour, he said, had always wanted to extend Maltese citizenship to those born abroad to Maltese mothers. And, in 2000, it was the opposition which insisted on the inclusion of an amendment in this sense. It was because of that amendment that the government could, now, go further by granting Maltese citizenship to people born to Maltese mothers even before independence.

Dr Gulia noted that if a person was born before 1964 to a mother who was a Maltese citizen, he or she would have to register for citizenship, whereas if it was the father who was Maltese the citizenship would be automatic.

Interjecting, Dr Borg said that the government had never accorded citizenship in retrospect to persons who had never been citizens.

Referring to second-generation citizens, Dr Gulia said there seemed to be four principles linked to the ascendant of the applicant. If the ascendant had died before 2006 the descendant could apply for citizenship. If the ascendant had died between 2007 and 2010 the descendant could apply in the grace period. If the ascendant died after 2010 and his application had not been decided on, the descendant could still apply for citizenship.

It was probable that once the legislation would have withstood the test of time there could be yet more developments and extensions of citizenship.

On the operation of the Citizenship and Expatriates Department, Dr Gulia said it was a small but important one because citizenship accorded both privileges and obligations. He would continue to advocate beefing up human resources because the staff now also had to handle work permits and the processing of long-term residence permits. The department had been inundated with applications for these permits.

This laid a huge amount of pressure on this efficient department, but its work was made more difficult because it was closely entwined with that of other departments such as the police. Initially at least, a simple receipt for the application was as valid as a visa, and so the department was almost assuming a police role. Before issuing the final permit the department had to wait for the Police decision on acceptance or otherwise. Some applications had been pending for months with the police, but even the police needed more human resources.

A long-term residence permit could also be issued on the basis of a work permit, even if the applicant had not been in Malta for more than five years. But the handling and issuing of work permits had recently been taken away from the Citizenship and Expatriates Department and given to the ETC.

The former was a political responsibility of the Minister for the Interior, whereas the latter was not. This sort of set-up undermined any legislation's efficiency.

Dr Gulia said all such activities should come under the leadership and political responsibility of the same ministry, as a one-stop shop.

On the issue of visas, Dr Gulia said efforts were being made to remove visa requirements for travel to the US but Malta also had very important links with Libya. Even though Malta issued visas to Libyans within three days, Libya had taken particular objection to the new state of affairs, which now made it more difficult for Maltese to go to Libya.

With the impending introduction of the Schengen agreement things would become even more difficult even though Malta would still be able to issue a visa within three days. The major difference was that Malta would have to consult the Schengen database, whereas now it did not.

Dr Gulia said he had been informed that even if a non-EU national applied for a visa for limited territory rather than the whole of the EU, Malta would still have to consult the Schengen database, with bureaucracy making it difficult to issue the visa within three days.

The rest of the debate will be reported tomorrow.