Repubblika welcomes the recent landmark judgment in the constitutional case brought by its former President, Dr Robert Aquilina, after almost six years of legal struggle to obtain information that should never have been kept from the public in the first place. The court’s decision is subject to appeal.
The case originated from a simple Freedom of Information request made in 2020, seeking to know how the Police Commissioner had proposed candidates for appointment to the Board of the Financial Intelligence Analysis Unit, and how the government had made its final choice. This was information directly relevant to public debate on corruption, impunity, and the independence of Malta’s institutions.
Instead of applying the law in good faith, the government chose to fight this request at every stage: refusing disclosure, forcing appeals, hiding behind technicalities, and prolonging proceedings for years. This most recent judgment confirms that this obstruction violated both the right to a fair hearing and the public’s right to receive information on matters of clear public interest.
The Court’s findings are politically significant. They expose how secrecy is systematically used by the State to shield executive power from scrutiny, and how institutional arrangements meant to protect transparency can in practice become instruments of delay and control.
This judgment reinforces a fundamental democratic principle: information held by government belongs to the public. Only truly exceptional and strictly justified reasons should ever limit access to it. In a democracy, secrecy must be the exception — not the default.
Repubblika reiterates the urgent need for a reformed Freedom of Information framework in Malta, one that genuinely empowers citizens, journalists, and civil society to oversee government conduct without being dragged through years of costly and exhausting litigation.
Repubblika also expresses its deep gratitude to Dr Robert Aquilina for his persistence in pursuing this case in the public interest, and to his lawyer, Dr Therese Comodini Cachia, for her rigorous and principled defence of constitutional rights in this important judgment.