What the inquiry proposed, the government disposed

The Caruana Galizia Public Inquiry found the Maltese State responsible for creating an atmosphere of impunity that led to the murder of journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in October 2017.

Apart from documenting its findings, the inquiry also made several recommendations to improve the rule of law and strengthen the protection of journalists. The vast majority of the recommendations were never implemented and, in those cases, where implementation was partial, too much has been left in abeyance. In some instances, the government has flatly refused to implement some of the reforms.

The recommendations of the public inquiry resurfaced on the national agenda in the wake of Yorgen Fenech’s acquittal. He was charged with masterminding Caruana Galizia’s assassination but after a 55-day trial, jurors acquitted him on both charges—conspiracy and criminal association—with an identical 8-1 vote-margin.

Last week, a solidarity protest in Valletta organised by Repubblika and Occupy Justice, supported by several organisations, including MaltaToday, called for justice to prevail and reforms highlighted by the public inquiry to be enacted.

Meanwhile, the Opposition has given notice of its intention to table an omnibus bill, containing several legal amendments to implement key proposals recommended by the inquiry.

MaltaToday took a look at the public inquiry’s key recommendations and the status of their implementation five years down the line.

PUBLIC INQUIRY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. UWOs: A law is required to fight financial crime including bribery and corruption by means of Unexplained Wealth Orders.

Status: Unimplemented. An attempt by former Justice Minister Edward Zammit Lewis to introduce UWOs as part of a new proceeds of crime law was shelved in 2021 over reported disagreement within government. The Opposition has consistently supported the introduction of UWOs and is making a similar recommendation in an omnibus bill it will present to parliament in October 2026.

2 Hindering crime investigation: A specific crime is introduced when a person holding a public position hinders or attempts to hinder the police or other authorities in the execution of their duties including crime investigations.

Status: Unimplemented. The Opposition is recommending the introduction of a specific offence for obstruction of justice in an omnibus bill it will present to parliament in October 2026. It is also proposing criminal consequences for public officials, who, deliberately and without valid justification, refuse or fail to perform their duty.

3. Mafia law: The necessity to introduce a crime similar to Article 416 bis of the Italian Criminal Code that deals with the crime of “mafia-style association”.

Status: Unimplemented. On the contrary, in January 2022, Prime Minister Robert Abela accused the Opposition of wanting to recognise Malta as a mafia state to paralyse the economy and instil fear by proposing such legislation. In its latest set of proposals, the Opposition, is proposing making participation in a mafia-type criminal association a specific offence.

4. Abuse of office: Introduce in the Maltese Criminal Code a new crime of abuse of office, which is committed by a public official or a person in charge of a public service in the execution of their duty or in the exercise of their functions.

Status: Unimplemented. No such specific crime exists and in January 2025, in the wake of criminal action that was underway against former civil service officials in relation to the Vitals hospitals scandal, Prime Minister Robert Abela had indicated his intention to pass legislation that would protect public officers from lengthy court cases. Eventually, when the bill was tabled in parliament months after, the government climbed down from its original intention limiting the protection afforded to public officers to personal liability in civil cases. The Opposition’s omnibus bill, slated for October, is expected to include a proposal to introduce a new offence of abuse of public authority. The offence would apply when an official breaches a specific rule governing a function, where the law does not allow discretion.

5. AG reform: The Attorney General law ought to be revised in order to fully implement the recommendations of the Venice Commission in regard to the full control of the investigation of serious crimes together with the police as well as to initiate an investigation directly.

Status: Implemented. The Attorney General is only responsible for prosecutions after the government advisory role was hived off into the newly-created State Advocate office in 2019. Further changes meant that prosecutions of serious crimes are now led by the AG together with the police.

6. Obstruction of justice: Introduce the crime of obstruction of justice in criminal law, similar to the obstruction of justice in several overseas codes. This would include appropriate sentences which also cover the attempt for perversion of justice.

Status: Unimplemented. The Opposition is recommending the introduction of a specific offence for obstruction of justice in an omnibus bill it will present to parliament in October 2026.

7. Code of ethics: Legislative provisions including in the Codes of Ethics are required to safeguard against improper conduct of public officials in the execution of their duties.

Status: Partially implemented. Key legal documents are the Public Administration Act, the Code of Ethics for public employees and board members, Directive No. 16 of 2023, and the Framework for preventing and managing conflicts of interest in the public sector, effective from February 2024. However, the European Commission’s Rule of Law Report 2026 states that action remains to be taken to improve the overall ethics framework of the public administration. The report stated that a detailed framework is in place to detect and manage conflicts of interest among public employees, including for senior officials and with regard to side activities, revolving doors as well as financial and non-financial interests. However, it added: “At the same time, it remains unclear which parts of the framework also apply to persons of trust.”

8. Police and journalists: The best protection that should be provided to whoever is exposed to serious risk is that the police are in a position to identify the cause of that risk in order to be able to provide protection against it. In the case of a journalist, this means, among others, a timely and effective investigation of the cause of that risk or risks. In order for this to occur, there needs to be an ad hoc structure within the police corps.

Status: Implemented. While it does not appear that the police force has an ad hoc structure to investigate wrongdoing flagged by a journalistic report, the force has over the past five years dedicated significantly more resources to departments the public inquiry had found very wanting, such as the financial crimes section. Additionally, the police force has boosted its intelligence gathering aspect to be able to identify risks that journalists and other people in the public domain could be exposed to as a result of their work. The force has also created a specific internal channel that journalists can report to or seek guidance from in the event of a suspected or actual threat. The police force has also collaborated with the Institute of Maltese Journalists (IĠM) to improve access and protection for media workers covering a crime scene or place of accident.

9. Dubious relationships: Measures need to be taken… to protect against situations of dubious relationships and contacts between high officials and others within the Police Corps and regulatory authorities with elements in the public administration and big business. Situations which obviously prejudice their independence and correctness in the execution of their functions.

Status: Partially implemented. This is a wide-ranging provision, which in the most part is regulated by existing codes of ethics and behaviour. However, the current legal framework contains no provisions that regulate lobbying or the use of private communication channels for public purposes. The government had shot down a proposal by the Opposition in January 2022 that sought to criminalise the use of unauthorised electronic resources by public officials or employees in the performance of their duties. The Yorgen Fenech trial exposed how official business was being conducted on WhatsApp and Signal thus bypassing any notion of accountability and traceability. The Opposition is again proposing the introduction of a law barring the use of unofficial electronic resources by public officials.

10. Journalistic protection: The public inquiry also made several recommendations to strengthen journalism and better protect journalists in their line of duty. The recommendations included: A reform to the Freedom of Information Act to ensure better access to public information in a timely manner; changes to the Media and Defamation Act to prevent SLAPP law suits from stifling journalists and the expiration of libel cases if the journalist dies while the case is still pending; constitutional amendments to strengthen freedom of expression, recognise journalism as one of the pillars of a democratic society and recognise an individual’s right to receive information from the State and the public authorities’ obligation to provide such information; the introduction of a code of ethics for journalists and its regulation by the Ombudsman or a specific commissioner. However, the inquiry recommended the provisions related to journalism be analysed and studied more in depth by a board of experts that would then produce its own specific proposals.

Status: Partially-implemented. The Committee of Experts was set up by the government in January 2022 headed by former Judge Michael Mallia, who also headed the Caruana Galizia Public Inquiry. The committee was tasked primarily to analyse a series of bills the government had tabled in parliament to reform the media sector. The committee produced its first draft later that year and after the summer government than produced revised legislative changes, which however, proved to be unsatisfactory. The committee was asked to carry out another review and public consultation, following which it produced its second and final report in July 2023. However, the government only published it after the summer and a formal public consultation was held in 2025.

No reforms have been carried out apart from the introduction of anti-SLAPP provisions through legal notice as part of an EU directive in 2024. The anti-SLAPP provisions allow the Maltese courts to reject the execution of foreign judgments if these are intended to stifle freedom of speech and produce a chilling effect. However, the government had refused an Opposition proposal to extend the anti-SLAPP provisions to domestic cases as the IĠM requested. In its latest proposals, the Opposition is proposing stronger constitutional protection for free and independent journalism and stronger protection against SLAPP proceedings. An idea floated by Opposition leader Alex Borg for journalists to have a warrant was shot down by the IĠM that described it as a threat to democracy. Borg later climbed down, insisting that any regulation of the journalistic profession should be self-regulation.

Translation of Daphne Caruana Galizia Public Inquiry recommendations courtesy of the Daphne Caruana Galizia Foundation.