The European Court's Decision on Golden Passports and the Consequences in Tirana

By Genc Pollo

How will the European Court decide: if it says it can't be done, we won't do it either; if it says it can be done, we will do it. More or less, this is what Edi Rama said in Tirana in March 2023 at the end of the Albania/European Union (Stabilization and Association Council) meeting in the presence of Mr. Borrell, High Representative for Foreign Policy, and Mr. Varhelyi, Commissioner for Enlargement.

It was about "golden passports" or granting citizenship to foreigners in return for payment or investment.

1-Golden passports as a problematic source of money

Rama had been engaged in this project for several years, participating in international events dedicated to "citizenship by investment", such as in London in November 2019, where he called the idea "the right way" and "something we should do". He explained that the European Commission was against the initiative, but here Brussels was wrong.

Golden passports were then practiced in three EU countries: Bulgaria, Cyprus and Malta. Brussels, rightly, saw this as a channel through which suspicious and dangerous individuals from third countries, including hostile states, could infiltrate. These passports were a window into risks related to national security, money laundering and corruption.

In fact, in Bulgaria and Cyprus, where scandals broke out, including videos of politicians accepting envelopes in exchange for the promise of a passport, Brussels' demarches led to the legal closure of this program. Only Maltese Prime Minister Muscat (Labour Party), who started this scheme in 2014, resisted Brussels in the name of "the sovereignty and interest of the Maltese people". This resistance continued even after the bribery scandals, and even after Muscat resigned when his government's involvement in the murder of an investigative journalist was proven. The next Prime Minister Abela, who turned out to have personally benefited by renting out his apartment to several Russian applicants for citizenship, continued the same line. The European Commission was forced to sue Malta for violating treaties and abusing "European citizenship". In fact, Malta did not simply give a Maltese passport, but as a member of the EU and the Schengen Area, it offered every neo-Maltese opportunities and privileges throughout Europe.

In Albania, Rama was forced to make the above statement (March 2023), but the government approved full legislation for the sale of passports, including the establishment of a special agency in the Ministry of Interior and the possibility that, a global precedent, the selection of applicants would be carried out by a concessionary company (PPP). The Albanian passport did not have all the qualities of the Maltese one, but it ensured free movement in Europe.

2-Court verdict against golden passports

On 29 April, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled against Malta in the golden passport case, stating that the acquisition of EU citizenship cannot result from a commercial transaction. Such a "commercialisation" of citizenship is incompatible with the basic concept of EU citizenship, as defined by the Treaties. It violates the principle of sincere cooperation and undermines mutual trust between Member States in the granting of their citizenship.

Recognizing that member states are free to determine the conditions under which citizenship is granted, the court ruled that this must be done in accordance with EU law. The court said that member states cannot grant citizenship, and therefore EU citizenship, in return for predetermined payments or investments. Citizenship is based on “solidarity, trust and reciprocity of rights and obligations between a state and its citizens” and that Malta’s scheme, which effectively commercializes citizenship, is incompatible with these principles, the court underlined.

The decision leaves Malta, but also any EU member state, open to selling citizenship. As the Maltese opposition has said, our passports “have value, but not price.”

It is unlikely that Rama will react to this development and explain how and why he wanted to use or abuse an achievement achieved three years before he became Prime Minister. It is interesting to note that a problematic project with negative consequences for the country (and the EU) could not be stopped by the opposition, civil society, media or judiciary. This time the help came from the European Commission. The EU's interest fortunately strictly coincided with the interest of Albania. Unlike the cases of some official from Brussels who may verbally express himself in general favor of the rule of law and against abstract corruption but with gestures and other things signal sympathy for the authoritarian and kleptocratic regime of Edi Rama.

Anyway, thank you to the Commission for that too.

(The author is President of the Paneuropa Albania movement)