A decision by the UN refugee agency to instruct EU states not to return illegal immigrants to Greece, even if they had already sought asylum status there, could have positive repercussions for Malta.
Under the so-called Dublin regulation, EU countries are able to return illegal immigrants to the member state where they first sought asylum.
However, the UNHCR is now urging member states not to return asylum-seekers to Greece until further notice because the immigrants were encountering problems getting back into the Greek asylum procedure. It said they risked being sent back to their countries of origin - therefore facing persecution or in worse cases execution.
Though the decision is not binding on member states, it could have a significant effect on the EU's asylum procedure and reception conditions.
Malta has been pressing for an equitable sharing of illegal immigrants with all countries in the EU and has argued in favour of scrapping the Dublin regulation.
When contacted, Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici said he intended to raise the implications of this decision when he has his first meeting as minister with a top UNHCR delegation.
Under the Dublin regulation, an asylum-seeker must stay in the first EU country of entry. If he travels, then the receiving member state has every right to send him back to the first recipient country.
Several immigrants who originally entered Malta found themselves in this situation. Since the asylum procedures were still active, they were caught and fingerprinted at a secondary EU airport, and once it was established they had entered another EU state via Malta, they were sent back to the island.
The UNHCR has in the past underlined the problems caused by the Dublin regulation, insisting that it places an unfair burden on all EU border member states, especially the southern and eastern countries.
The 10-page-report seen by The Sunday Times states: "As a matter of solidarity and responsibility sharing, and in order to ensure a fair and effective application of the Dublin regulation, it is nonetheless an issue concerning all EU member states, if a member state is facing considerable challenges in complying with the relevant standards."
The UNHCR goes on to encourage governments and the European Commission to reinforce their support for Greece in addressing the existing structural and qualitative shortcomings of its asylum system and practice.
The UN underlines aspects like bilateral partnership or twinning arrangements, increased EU funding for asylum-related projects in Greece and specific responsibility sharing arrangements.
There are two interpretations to the report. On one side, Greece has had its knuckles wrapped publicly for providing miserable reception facilities. But on the other, it has been relieved of returning immigrant flows, albeit temporarily.
Neil Falzon, head of the UN refugee office in Malta, said the report had wide-ranging implications.
Though the UN is fully aware of the challenges Malta is facing with immigration flows, it has constantly harped on the need for better reception conditions.
Though Dr Falzon was not able to say if the decision on Greece could be extended to Malta, he said that the UNHCR was also taking note of the fact that the US was absorbing a number of refugees from Malta.
Admitting surprise at the UN's decision on Greece, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said the government's initial response to the document was "moderately positive".
He said it was high time for the EU to recognise that countries like Cyprus, Greece, Malta and Italy were on the front line of immigration and that the Dublin convention only served to dent the concept of solidarity and burden sharing.